Good morning, everyone.

It is 9:33.

We are gonna go ahead and call our Saturday public meeting to order.

Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Mayor Gaskins.

Here.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

Councilman Ageary.

Councilman Chapman.

Councilman L N here.

Councilwoman Green.

Here.

Councilwoman Marks.

Here.

Okay, Madam Clerk, next item.

Presentation of a proclamation recognizing emergency medical services week.

Okay, we have two proclamations today.

I have asked the Vice Mayor to read our first proclamation.

If you are here joining us to recognize Emergency Medical Services Week, we ask that you please come to the front at this time.

See our fire chief.

Yeah.

One second, we should have a hand microphone.

You just stall.

Here.

I think it's necessary for the project.

Thank you, Jim.

Good morning.

Good morning.

All right, good morning, everybody.

Um I uh as the mayor mentioned, um, I'm Vice Mayor Sarah Bagley.

I am going to read this proclamation, and then I'm gonna ask um our colleagues and professionals here to uh introduce themselves and say a few words.

All right.

Whereas in 1974, President Gerald Ford authorized EMS week to celebrate emergency medical service professionals and the important work they do in our nation's communities.

And whereas the Alexandria community was already a pioneering EMS center since 1961, when Alexandria Hospital initiated full-time emergency medical care and spread their Alexandria plan across the nation.

And whereas our community achieved another milestone in 1976 when the Alexandria Fire Department hired its first group of medics to perform advanced life support services, now marking its 50th anniversary.

Whereas access to emergency medical care is a vital public service that dramatically improves the survival and recovery of people in the community who experience sudden illness and injury.

Thank you very much.

Good morning, everyone.

So, with that being said, is a great transition to our new medical director that I just acknowledge, and I'm gonna pass over to him.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone.

I'm Gordon Taylor, Dr.

Gordon Taylor.

I'm an emergency medicine physician by Trendon.

I'm excited and eager to join the long proud legacy of EMS and Alexandria, and we're hoping to improve pre-hospital outcomes and work together and improving and getting the legacy further.

Thank you.

Uh hi, everyone.

My name is uh Anthony Kelly.

I'm a battalion chief with the fire department, currently in charge of our training division.

Um I joined today because we are also working on a project uh with Virginia Tech to enhance um our EMS service delivery and making better decisions and bringing on um using AI and uh some of the newer technology to help us uh along what we're doing.

So we're really excited about that partnership and like to thank the uh fire chief uh for allowing us to um be involved in that.

We're looking forward to the outcome of that.

Thank you.

I want to thank you, gentlemen, for being here.

Welcome to the city and to the role, the position.

We're glad to have you.

I think this also provides an opportunity.

Um, we will be having uh on June 1st, I believe, the memorial for the um air the air crash victims, but I wanted to use that opportunity to highlight the work of your department.

Um, I don't know if everybody realizes, but um many of the first responders on that scene on the scene that day were from the Alexandria Fire Department, and they continued to play a vital role um in the days that followed.

So um I know like the nation had its eyes on us in that moment, and um, you really did us proud and did the community proud and did just excellent work responding to uh a unique and tragic situation.

So thank you very much for being here and for your work every day that you're doing in the community.

Thank you.

And um, with that, Mayor Gaskins, I will move the proclamation.

Hey, there has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman Chapman.

Is there any oh he left?

Okay, I think he has a call.

He has a call.

There are if you weren't clear on the dedication of the men and women in our fire department before, you are now.

Um, with that, is there any further discussion?

Seeing that, I would just say I don't think there are enough thank yous that we can give for the important job that you do.

And I hope that you know that in just small ways through the proclamation, but in other things that we're trying to do through collective bargaining, how much we appreciate you, chief, and how much we appreciate all the men and women who serve.

I know it is a job that comes with tremendous sacrifice.

And so if you don't hear it enough, please know how proud we are of you.

Um, how much we appreciate the leadership, the professionalism, and the dedication, as we just saw for all the men and women in in AFD.

And Dr.

Taylor, we haven't met yet, but I really look forward to working with you.

I'm glad that you are the first.

I had a chance to read your bio.

I'm glad you are the first in this position, and I know that you're doing an excellent job.

So, with that, there has been a f um a motion and a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye, any opposed.

All right, the ayes haven't, and the motion the proclamation has okay, madam clerk.

Next item.

Presentation of a proclamation recognizing May as Medical Health Awareness Month.

Okay.

Um, I have asked Councilwoman Jacenta Green to read this proclamation.

If you are here joining us in recognition of May as Mental Health Awareness Month, I ask that you please come to the front at this time.

Well, it might just be you, Ms.

Green.

It just might be.

That's all right, though, because we have wonderful, wonderful people that work um in the mental health realm.

I am so sorry that they're not here today or not able to be here today because they do do wonderful things for our community.

So I will make sure that they they get this proclamation, but I sure wish they could have been here.

All right.

I will read the proclamation.

Whereas mental health is an essential part of overall health and well-being, shaping how we think, feel, connect with others, and move through the world.

And whereas mental health conditions are medical conditions that can affect anyone with more than one in four adults experiencing a serious mental health condition or a concurring substance use issue.

Whereas the city of Alexandria is committed to ensuring that residents do not navigate these challenges alone, providing 24-7 support through the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline and the Department of Community and Human Services, DCHS emergency services.

And whereas the city provides accessible trauma-informed care through same-day access assessments at the Dell Pepper Community Resource Center, right here, offering residents immediate connections to behavioral health services, regardless of their ability to pay.

Whereas regional partners, such as NAMI, Northern Virginia provide vital peer and family support groups, education and advocacy to help in the stigma surrounding mental illness and create a more supportive community.

And whereas recovery is possible and we can connect individuals to the right support at the right time to enhance the resilience of all Alexandrians.

Now, therefore, I, Councilwoman Gacinta Green, on behalf of Aliyah Gaskins, Mayor of the City of Alexandria, and on behalf of the Alexandria City Council, do hereby proclaim May 2026 as Mental Health Awareness Month in the City of Alexandria and urges all residents to support one another, utilize available local resources and work together to eliminate the stigma associated with mental health care.

In witness hereof, I'm sorry, and witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and cause the seal of the city of Alexandria, Virginia to be a fixed this 16th day of May 2026.

Mayor Larry Gaskins.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And I will say mental health and Alethe, you could have been up here with me.

Did you want to come up?

Okay.

All right.

I would just want like to say that I am so proud to serve in a city that provides all the supports that we need with people that are dealing with issues that can truly, truly um be, you know, taken care of with the with the correct support.

So without them being here today, they really tell great stories of the great things that they've done.

Um, but um I think uh there's there's opportunity for our mental health professionals to come back at another time to let us know all the good things that they do.

So with that, I would like to move to adopt the proclamation.

Madam Mayor.

There has been a motion to adopt the proclamation by councilwoman Green and a second by Councilman L Newby.

Is there any further discussion?

Um, I would I would just say, as uh Councilwoman Green mentioned, as we recognize Mental Health Awareness Month, there will be a number of events happening throughout the city.

Earlier this week, uh shelter care, a number of our young people organized a car wash called Wash Away the Stigma, in which they were inviting residents to hear about some of their experiences and to learn more about the resources available.

We have also launched through DCHS and our Children, Youth and Families Commission a new calendar for teens with events as well as opportunities for additional resources to learn about mental health supports across our community.

And then there will be a number of trainings available to community members in programs like mental health first aid.

So I would encourage anyone who's interested to please visit our website to learn more about those offerings, recognizing that our community's health is all of our issue, and we can all work to support one another.

So with that, there has been a motion and a second.

Seeing no further discussion, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Right?

The ayes have it, and the proclamation passes.

Okay, before we go to our next item, I'm going to ask for a motion to take one item out of order, and that is item number eight.

As my colleagues may recall, we had some discussion about moving item eight to a future docket.

And so I need a motion to pull this from the consent agenda and to um move it to the public hearing in June.

So there has been a motion by councilwoman Green and a second by Councilman Chapman to pull item eight from the consent agenda and move to the June public hearing for joint council's vote on this past Tuesday.

Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote.

Please call the roll.

Councilwoman Green.

Aye.

Councilman Chapman.

Mayor Gaskins.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

Hi.

Councilman Aguirre.

Councilman L Newby.

Councilwoman Marks.

Aye.

Okay.

And we do not have an need to have an additional vote at this time on that item because the item is still living and the vote will uh take place in June.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Public discussion period.

Okay.

Um, so a couple other notes I needed to make.

There are a few discussion items that were at the bottom of our agenda.

One of those items is related to beekeeping.

The planning commission decided to defer that ordinance.

I know that there are some people who are signed up to speak today.

So if you want to speak, since we will not be hearing that item today, we invite you to give testimony during this public discussion period.

This public discussion period is the one that we do every Saturday.

The what we will do is we will take the first 15 speakers and then we will pause and go into our regular business.

If there's anyone that we do not get to, we will come back to you at the end of all other business.

A few announcements.

One, the purpose of public hearings and for the purpose of conducting business.

And so we invite people to participate.

Signs are welcome.

You're able to snap.

We ask that you not clap because that's a little harder for the transition for us to hear.

If disruptive behavior does occur, I will give one warning.

And then if it continues, I will ask one of our officers from APD to have you removed from I almost said the courtroom.

It's not the courtroom.

Everyone will have three minutes to speak.

I apologize in advance.

I am not cutting you off, but I am going to stick to the three.

I'm going to stick to the three minutes.

So it's not in to be rude, but we do have another item later today that has a number of speakers.

When we get to that item, I will give different rules, but this this portion will move as the way it always has.

So with that, let me begin with our first speaker, and that is Jennifer DeBias.

Good morning.

Good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members.

I am Jennifer DeBias with the city's Environmental Policy Commission.

Um here to provide you with our monthly update, which today will be on our recent retreat.

I'd first like to thank Vice Mayor Bagley, Councilman Chapman, Councilman Ilnubi, Councilman Aguirre, and now Councilwoman Marks for joining in our EPC annual retreat.

Having five members of council participate in an open discussion with our commission was incredibly valuable.

As an advisory body, that dialogue helps us better understand council's priorities and strengthens our ability to provide thoughtful and practical recommendations and support of the city's climate goals.

During the retreat, the EPC received an update from the Office of Climate Action on FY27 priorities and recent progress.

We discovered several or we discussed several important wins over the past year, including the updated green building policy, continued growth in Dash ridership and capital bike share use, and the city's broader efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase renewable energy adaptation.

We also heard about new and ongoing programs, which we support, such as Stay Cool ALX, Eco City Homes and Businesses, and community engagement efforts through Eco City Alexandria.

The commission also heard from the City of Richmond's director of sustainability, who shared insights about Richmond's work around environmental justice.

They also discussed climate resilience and community-centered sustainability initiatives.

That conversation reinforced the importance of building partnerships, engaging residents directly, and ensuring sustainability efforts are accessible and equitable across all communities.

A portion of our retreat also focused on the open discussion with council members around key issues facing Alexandria, including stormwater and flood resilience, transportation infrastructure, dash electrification, housing equity, and the unique challenges in the West End, including heat impacts, bike safety, and public transportation access.

We also discussed the importance of safe infrastructure that supports active transportation for all residents, including students traveling to schools.

Internally, the retreat gave the commission an opportunity to reflect on our role to support you and to reconnect with our four core priorities, which you will hear throughout our recommendations coming up in the upcoming fiscal year.

These priorities are decarbonizing buildings, decarbonizing transportation, environmental justice, and resilience and adaptation.

As we move into the upcoming year, we want to keep these priorities front and center in our recommendations, our engagement, and our collaboration with you, staff, ACPS, and the broader community.

Thank you as always for your support and your partnership.

Thank you so much for your time today.

Our next speaker is Susan Parker.

She's online.

She can uh start talking now.

Hey, Susan, you can begin um whenever you're ready.

Hello, can you guys hear me?

Yes, we can.

Awesome.

Uh my name is Susan Parker.

My husband and I purchased a home in North Old Town about seven years ago.

Since moving here, we've seen a tremendous growth of young people and families, which I find to be absolutely wonderful.

Wonderful.

Uh, that being said, on April 20th at about 5:30 p.m., our dear friend and member of our community, Norma Floyd was struck and killed by a motor vehicle while crossing Montgomery Street at North St.

Asset.

Um, I hate that it took a tragedy like this for me to come before the city council to discuss serious uh safety concerns that come that have come with the rapid growth of our community.

First of all, construction impact, we're really seeing the rapid new addition to apartments and condos significantly increasing foot traffic, vehicle traffic, and numbers of dogs in the neighborhood.

Parking has become a serious issue for residents during inclement weather.

Finding a spot is nearly impossible and at the risk of a ticket, which have recently increased in their fines, making even running errands stressful.

Construction activities damaging vehicles, and we have three, we've had three screws in our tire in our car's tires this year alone.

Um, I also believe that we have a bit of a signage consistency issue.

Drivers tend to focus on traffic traffic lights and frequently blow through stop signs leading to near miss pedestrian incidents on a regular basis.

Um turn on red rolls vary from intersection to intersection.

They should be consistent throughout all of Old Town.

Overgrown trees are obstructing signs.

The same asset and Montgomery intersection is a notable example, leaving giant drivers unable to see critical signage.

And lastly, and I don't say most importantly, but Montgomery's George Washington uh parkway intersection.

This this intersection is a serious safety concern.

Well, we understand the GW parkway serves as a through route from DC to Maryland.

Drivers uh inattention or drivers not paying attention is creating dangerous conditions.

Pedestrians are only given 25 seconds to cross the five the five lanes of George Washington.

Many uh many DC intersections allow more time for fewer lanes.

Wrong way drivers down Montgomery are persistent and in an escalating problem.

I have counted personally 40 incidents of this this year alone and was nearly struck myself by a car turning the wrong way down said one way street, an intersection I crossed at least twice daily.

Northbound drivers on GW uh make illegal left turns on the Montgomery's suggesting the signage is either not visible or not enforced.

The southbound pedestrians crossing Montgomery are frequently endangered by cards speeding down DW to turn right onto Montgomery, even though the walks signal is active.

In closing, we are generally glad to see Old Town North growing, and we take pride in our community.

Our local bars, restaurants, gyms, coffee shops, and grocery stores make this place a or make this a wonderful place to live.

But growth must be matched with safety.

Recently, uh we see officers responding to two events.

Yes.

Um I I'm so sorry to cut you.

It's been three minutes.

I want to thank you for your testimony.

What I will say in follow-up is I wrote down I heard pedestrian safety, construction management, signage, enforcement, and the Montgomery and GW Parkway intersection.

What we'll do is we'll have the manager follow up because each of those items cuts across a couple different departments.

And so we'll get you one comprehensive response.

But thank you so much for your time today.

Uh our next speaker is Aaron Gurless.

I apologize in advance, guys.

This is my greatest weakness.

We do all these names.

And I'm here to reiterate why Alexandria City needs beekeeping regulations.

Last year, my own yard became unusable, underscoring the need for these rules.

One hive holds 20 to 60,000 bees, and in a tight neighborhood, they inevitably spread into nearby yards.

Overnight, I was living mere feet from hundreds of thousands of bees with no say at all.

This was no minor inconvenience.

My dog couldn't go outside because the lawn was covered with bees, sourcing nectar provided by the clover.

Yard work was dangerous.

Mowing near the shared chain link fence was terrifying, and gardening went from being relaxing to stressful as bees were constantly in my face.

Backyard barbecue ceased.

My allergic friend quit visiting altogether, and guard bees chased me and my dog on numerous occasions.

Worst of all, I had to helplessly watch my dog Romeo suffer after being stung, whimpering and limping for days, and eventually becoming terrified of and refusing to enter the backyard at all.

Bees also got into my home daily, drawn to my porch and kitchen lights.

After Romeo was stung three times in 10 days, I went to the city for help.

But with no laws in place, the city couldn't act.

Out of desperation.

I informed my neighbors, landlord, that my only recourse was a civil nuisance lawsuit, something most can't afford or want to pursue.

What began is one hobby hive became four, then suddenly 10 more for raising and selling bees and honey.

That is an agricultural business.

And as I understand it, agricultural production and sales are prohibited in residential yards in this city.

Yet without regulations, it still happened next door to me in Old Town.

My situation ended only because the beekeepers moved.

That's not a solution, just luck.

Just luck.

And residents shouldn't have to depend on luck for basic safety at home.

I was relieved when the city drafted beekeeping regulations, modest rules, and far less restrictive than many nearby localities.

But the zoning board deferred because they felt it wasn't under their purview.

During that meeting, one board member questioned whether the city had authority to regulate it, and another asked why Virginia's state laws weren't enough.

The answers are simple.

Virginia's beekeeping laws protect the well-being of bees, not the safety of nearby humans or pets.

The state does provide non-binding best practices like recommended setbacks and hive limits, but they aren't enforceable.

They only outline how beekeepers can avoid liability for nuisance or physical harm caused by their bees, while their neighbors only option is an expensive lawsuit.

Alexandria City absolutely has the authority to adopt regulations, just as it bans backyard chickens, even though the state doesn't.

And beyond authority, the city has a duty to protect its residents' health, safety, and ability to enjoy their homes.

I urge you to enact protective rules without further delay.

And I'm so very grateful for your time.

And I cannot believe I actually did it within three minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you for saying you set the example.

It was perfect.

Thank you for being here today.

All right.

Our next speaker is JW Grenadier.

Good morning, everybody.

So glad that we are getting to summer.

Um, the pattern and practice of protecting our own in Virginia is coming to an end.

I am asking the city council to take this seriously.

I'm not asking you to decide a court case today.

I'm asking you to recognize that when a homeowner presents evidence and documents.

The city council's oath of office calls them to act.

The city law, the city's liability grows the longer it does nothing, and the public pays for the protection the city refuses to provide.

Lois Lucas, along with Governor Spanberger, had several buildings that were um searched by the FBI this month.

The Commonwealth of Fairfax was in front of um Congress this week.

South Carolina, um, the murder case was overturned due to the clerk.

On Monday, I will be spending a formal request to the clerk, the clerk's office, state officials, and federal authorities concerning serious record and title issues and vobbing my home.

The question is simple.

If no entity can prove lawful ownership of a loan, how is a foreclosure allowed to proceed?

The record shows multiple assignments, an affidavit of loss assignment, and later statements from Wells Fargo indicating no loan, no ownership, no records tied to the property.

Yet foreclosure still proceeded.

Title was transferred, and the court record continues to rely on documents whose has vitality has been challenged.

I also want to raise concern regarding the judicial assignment process connected to these proceedings.

After recusals involving the local judges, Virginia Code 17.1105B was ignored.

Instead of a low instead, a local attorney, David Brock Bracken was selected to preside over the proceedings.

Whether that process complied with statutory requirements is a legitimate question that deserves review.

This is about Alexandria's public records, court records, and proper records.

Can they be trusted?

Recent events show why the matters in South Carolina, the Supreme Court overturned Alec Smurdock's conviction because the clerk of courts conduct, even though the case was a different case, fairness and process was looked at.

Here in Virginia, we are also seeing federal scrutiny of public corruption issues.

That should remind every local government that transparency, record integrity, and accountability are not optional.

As should you, the letter will state that this has been going on since 2018.

The only reason I'm still in the house is I have standing.

I have standing of three different documents filed against the home.

Thank you for your time today.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Andrew Ortiz.

Do we have Andrew in the room or is he online?

Andrew is not online.

Okay, I'll pause in one more time.

Andrew Artis, are you in overflow or here?

Okay.

Um with that, we will move forward.

There are no additional speakers for this portion.

With that, can I have a motion to close the public hearing?

Move the closed public hearing.

There's been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley to close the public hearing and a second by councilwoman Green.

Is there any additional discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor of closing the public hearing say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

The ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Roll call consent seven through five through seven and nine through eleven.

Okay.

And to approve.

There's been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley to approve the roll call consent items five through seven and items nine through eleven.

And has been seconded by councilwoman Green.

Is there any additional discussion?

Seeing none, Madam Clerk, this yes, uh Vice Mayor Bagley.

I'm in support of these.

The only thing I just want to highlight for the community is we are approving here the old town pool replacement.

So I would just um, if you're interested in that, there is a presentation in it.

We obviously are trying to move quickly today, but I just wanted to highlight that that that's on the docket.

It will be moving forward.

Um, all the plans are laid out.

Um, it will be open this summer as its last season, and then it will be out of commission for about a year to reopen in 2028 if all goes to plan.

That's right.

Thank you.

No, I think that is exciting, exciting news.

So thank you for lifting that up.

With that, there has been a motion and a second.

Madam Clerk, this is a roll call vote.

Please call the roll.

Vice Mayor Bagley.

Aye.

Councilwoman Green.

Aye.

Mayor Gaskins.

Aye.

Councilman Gary.

Aye.

Councilman Chapman.

All right.

Councilman El Nubi.

Aye.

Councilwoman Marks.

Aye.

All right.

The ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, next item.

Public hearing and consideration of an appeals of the traffic and parking board's February 23rd, 2023 decision to recommend roadway design changes as part of the Braddock Road Border Improvements Project.

Okay.

So as we prepare to do this item, I just want to frame a little bit of what's going to happen so that we're all we're all on the same page.

I ask that people have patience and bear with us because there are going to be a lot of speakers and a lot of conversations and information that we need to manage.

And so we're trying to set this out as structured as possible.

So first there will be a presentation by city staff.

I will then invite my colleagues to offer clarifying questions.

Then we will go into presentations by representatives from each of the four appellants.

Each of the four appellants was invited to choose a representative to present their appeal.

Other folks who may have been a part of the appeal were able to sign up for three minutes as part of the public process since they're not a part of that presentation.

After each of the four appellants go, they will have 10 minutes, not three.

They will be invited to have questions from the council to ask dialogue back and forth.

Then we will go into a presentation from the chair of the traffic and parking board.

That will be followed by Claire Byan questions from the council.

Plus you at that time, we will then go into our public comment period.

For the public comment period, once we get there, I'll give sort of just a specific overview, but it's three minutes for each person.

And then we will go into after that, we will close the public hearing and then we will go into questions and deliberation from the council member.

And then at that point, we have the option to either vote to retain, remove, or change components of the Braddock Road Corridor Improvements Project.

In terms of the appeals themselves, the order will be so many little pieces of paper.

Um we will start with the appeal submitted by Anna Frame, and that will be presented by Carrie Pegram.

We will then have the appeal submitted by Margaret Janowski, and that will be uh that will be presented by Brittany DiPiano.

We will then have the appeal submitted by Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, and that will be um presented by Reverend Kate Costa.

And then finally, we will have the um the appeal presented from the community praised seventh day adventist uh appeal.

And let me see.

I have um I guess so.

Let me check with Madam Clerk.

I have one that says that they have just submitted the video, and then I have another that they have identified a representative.

Um let me come back to that one so we we can discuss on what um because this I have from Gloria.

So let me just check check on that one.

We'll come back on that part, but that will be the flow as to how we are moving moving through this.

So with that, I am going to turn it over to staff.

What I would ask is before you begin, let's have everyone introduce themselves and then we'll begin with our presentation.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Good morning.

My name is Hillary Orham, Deputy Director of Transportation.

Um today, staff is here to present to you the Braddock Road Corridor Improvement Project.

And so in for time, I'm just going to introduce each staff member that we have here with us today.

Alex Carroll is the project manager on the city side.

Dan Scalise is the project manager from Michael Baker, our consulting firm that was a part of this project.

We have uh director of transportation and environmental services, Leah Riley, Assistant City Attorney Lindsay Dubin, and Transportation Engineering Division Chief Ryan Knight here with us today.

So we recognize that this project has generated a lot of community interest and differing perspectives, which is understandable when we are looking at a roadway that affects how people travel along the corridor, how they park, how they access their homes and move through the neighborhood on a daily basis.

Staff has heard a wide range of feedback throughout this process, including concerns about parking and traffic operations, as well as a lot of support for the project and the multimodal goals that are embedded in the recommendation before you today.

But this recommendation is not based on one factor alone.

It's grounded in policy direction from City Council that you've established over many years, and our transportation plans, our policy and safety goals, and our multimodal priorities, alongside a lot of technical and engineering analysis, engineering best practices, as well as extensive public outreach.

So, as with many transportation projects, we know that there are a lot of trade-offs that we're considering, and staff has worked really hard to evaluate these trade-offs carefully in an effort to provide you with a recommendation today that provides the greatest overall benefit to the community.

So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Alex, who is going to go through a presentation.

Thank you, Hillary, for the introduction and good morning, Mayor Gaskins, Vice Mayor Bagley, members of council.

As Hillary noted, I'm Alex Carroll, Complete Streets Program Manager.

I do want to note before I get into the presentation that this is an abridged version of the presentation, but the full-length uh presentation that was previously provided to the traffic and parking board at their February public hearing is included in your docket materials for reference.

So the request before you all today is to consider an appeal of the traffic and parking board's February recommendation of the Braddock Road Corridor Improvements Project.

Staff will be uh recommending that council concur with the board's decision.

And what we'll be discussing throughout this process is what the recommended project entails to improve mobility, access, safety, and comfort for all roadway users on Braddock Road.

So starting with a little bit of project background, um, this project began in winter 2025 and is rooted in numerous city plans and policies.

Uh the project improves travel options in accordance with the Alexandria Mobility Plan, improves safety in alignment with Vision Zero, enhances mobility and access for all modes in alignment with the complete streets policy, supports supports sustainable travel options in alignment with the environmental action plan, and it implements recommendations from the safe routes to school walk audit for George Washington Middle School.

So, in short, as Hillary noted, this project advances numerous plans and policies that have been previously adopted by city council.

So I want to share a little bit of the project area for context.

Uh, include the project area includes Braddock Road between West Street and Russell Road, the easternmost end of the Braddock Road Corridor.

Braddock is, of course, uh a key link providing access to multiple neighborhoods, including Delray, Potomac Yard, and Old Town.

It also provides direct access to multiple schools, including George Washington Middle School, and it's less than half a mile from Jefferson Houston and Naomi Brooks.

Additionally, Alexandria City High School is just a 10-minute bike right away.

Of course, Braddock also connects directly to the Braddock Road Metro Rail Station, which provides transit access throughout the region.

There are also important regional trail connections here shown in brown.

The Potomac Yard Trail and the Metro Linear Trail are both highly used by people biking and provide off-street access to other Alexandria neighborhoods, as well as Arlington and DC.

There are also bike lanes on portions of Braddock Road and Commonwealth Avenue, which are shown on this map in green.

However, they are not continuous and they do not provide safe, comfortable access to this regional transit hub today.

There is an opportunity here to connect these bike lanes and link them to future bicycle connections on Madison Street.

This would essentially create an east-west connection that could eventually allow people to bike and scoot from the west end of Alexandria to the waterfront.

The project is broken up into three segments.

Segment two between Mount Vernon Avenue and Commonwealth Avenue.

And segment three between Commonwealth Avenue and Russell Road.

And all in all, the total project length is just under one mile.

So the proposed project has something for all modes.

So for drivers, they will see easier transitions at intersections and fewer conflicts with other road users with similar delays to today.

However, on street parking would be removed on Braddock Road.

People walking would benefit from slower speeds, having a buffer space provided by the bicycle lane and shorter crossing distances.

People biking would also benefit from slower speeds and have a dedicated place to ride.

And lastly, especially given that this is such a rich transit area, people taking transit would have safer crossings to access bus stops and the metro.

Bus stops could become more accessible, and people would have more options for accessing this high capacity transit hub.

One thing I want to emphasize is that the stress that people endure while biking or scooting deters many people from riding at all.

This here is a map of the bicycle level of traffic stress on Braddock Road, with one being the lowest and four being the highest amount of stress.

Today, Braddock is rated as a three, which is a moderately high bicycle level of traffic stress due to the lack of comfortable bicycle lanes, especially the having the bicycle lanes appear and reappear, appear and disappear at different parts of the corridor.

This essentially means that right now Braddock is only designed to accommodate those who are very confident on a bike and are comfortable riding in mixed traffic with motor vehicles.

So the way that Braddock is designed today, we are essentially excluding a large portion of the population from being able to bike or scoot.

Studies show that only a small portion of the population is confident enough to bike in stressful environments.

These are our strong and fearless riders shown here on the slide.

Meanwhile, over half of people are considered interested but concerned, meaning that they want to bike, but they're not confident and will only bike in very safe and comfortable conditions.

Local studies echo this sentiment based on the most recent Alex Move survey, which is the city's biannual transportation survey.

Over two-thirds of Alexandrians say they would be more likely to bike for transportation if they felt safe from traffic.

And what we're trying to do through this project when we're adding bike lanes on Braddock Road is consider their needs in the design.

So now I'm going to get into the recommended design that the traffic and parking board voted on at their February meeting.

The next several slides will show the corridor concepts and then we'll cover the intersection concepts.

So starting with segment one near the metro station and the middle school.

So right now, the street here is four lanes, two in each direction with unprotected bicycle lanes on both sides.

The recommended design, shown on the right, would reduce Braddock to two lanes.

So one travel lane in each direction.

Excuse me.

This would allow for safer crossings, particularly at the Potomac Yard Trail and at the Braddock Road Metro, which are both uncontrolled crossings.

This would also create space for an in-street extension of the Potomac Yard Trail, which would connect directly to the metro station, minimizing unnecessary crossing of Braddock Road and people riding the wrong way and people riding on the sidewalk.

The paint-only bike lanes that exist today would be upgraded to protected bicycle lanes in this concept.

I do want to note that the recommendations for this particular segment were not appealed.

So while council can still consider it, it is not the focus of the hearing.

Segment two between Mount Vernon Avenue and Commonwealth Avenue is where Braddock Road narrows and becomes more residential.

This is the narrowest part of the project corridor.

Here there is one travel lane in each direction and parking on both sides.

The recommended design would remove on-street parking and install bicycle lanes.

I do want to note that on-street parking would be retained in two areas next to a home without a driveway and where and in another area where a curb, an existing sort of curb indentation, creates more space for people to park alongside the bicycle lane.

Now on segment three, between Commonwealth and Russell, the street gets a bit wider.

The existing layout again has two travel lanes and parking on both sides.

The recommended concept would remove on-street parking and install protected bicycle lanes.

Now getting into the intersection, starting with Braddock and Mount Vernon.

In the existing condition, there are dedicated left turn lanes, both on Braddock Road eastbound and westbound, approaching Mount Vernon Avenue.

In the recommended design, the left turn lanes on Braddock would be consolidated with the through lanes.

This would do a few different things.

It would reduce exposure for people walking by reducing the number of vehicle lanes that they have to cross.

It would also allow the bicycle lanes to continue through the intersection, which they don't do today.

And then the travel lanes on Mount Vernon Avenue in this concept would remain unchanged.

Next we have Commonwealth Avenue.

In the existing condition, again, this intersection has dedicated left turn lanes, which are shown in the image on the left.

I do want to note that for people who are uh driving through these this intersection and who are going straight, it can be a bit awkward because they have to jog over to the right to actually continue straight through the intersection.

And that lane doesn't line up with the receiving lane on the other side of the intersection.

Um in the recommended design shown on the right, the existing left turn lanes on all approaches uh would be consolidated with the through and the right lanes.

So again, this would reduce pedestrian exposure by having fewer lanes to cross.

It would also allow the bike lanes to continue through the intersection, both on Braddock and on Commonwealth, which is another um key bike corridor in the city.

And it would better align the travel lanes for drivers proceeding through the intersection.

Lastly, at Russell Road, uh the left turn lanes on the Braddock Road approaches would be consolidated as well.

I do want to note um that an earlier iteration of this concept showed reversing the direction of West Alexandria.

Um today it is one way westbound, and earlier iteration showed it being reversed to one way eastbound.

We did hear a lot of community feedback on that throughout the project process.

And after listening to that feedback, we opted to keep um West Alexandria as it is today.

Um and I do want to note that um nothing on Russell Road would be changed in the proposed concept.

So that is what the traffic and parking board recommended uh at its February public hearing.

Of course, subsequently, the board's recommendation was appealed.

Um the key concerns that I'm gonna cover include parking impacts, ADA access, and traffic operations.

I'm gonna briefly talk about those.

Starting with parking.

Um, the project does propose to remove most on street parking on Braddock Road on segments two and three.

Uh however, parking utilization from what we found is fairly low, um, less than 50%.

Additionally, nearly all homes on Braddock Road have driveways, and there is off-street parking available on side streets within one to two blocks of Braddock that could absorb additional parking.

Uh so to summarize, there is ample parking capacity to meet demand in this area.

Uh concerns have also been shared about ADA access, particularly near Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, which is on segment three and shown here on the slide.

Uh so again, the recommended design would remove the on-street parking on Braddock, which would include this ADA parking space.

However, two as part of the recommended concept, two new spaces are proposed to be added on Hancock Avenue and Loray Avenue adjacent to the church, which would continue to provide ADA access.

Uh as part of this project, the sit the city did complete a traffic study to assess the existing conditions and the impacts of the proposed changes.

What we found from that study is that overall intersection operations are acceptable in the existing condition, um, operating around a B or a C level of service during the afternoon peak hours.

Um, what we also found is that they would continue to perform acceptably with the recommended design.

Overall intersection delay would be similar to today at around 30 seconds during the afternoon peak hour.

Finally, um, as Hillary noted, the city performed nearly a year of community engagement on this project.

Um, this was done through press releases, project signs, stakeholder emails, social media, in-person meetings, online feedback forms, and more.

Uh nearly 600 people provided feedback to the city on the design options.

What we heard from that feedback was that respondents overwhelmingly support the overall project goals of providing safe walking and biking infrastructure.

Uh, we also heard that people strongly supported the changes next to the metro station in segment one.

So, what we're really here to talk about is segment two and three.

Um, and while uh removing parking has certainly been a concern for some folks in the immediate project area.

I do want to note that overall the feedback that we received through our online feedback form showed that most people felt positive or neutral about removing the parking on both sides of Braddock.

So, with that, the staff recommendation today is that city council uphold the traffic and parking board's February 23rd recommendation for Braddock Road.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you for your presentation.

At this time, I will open it up to the council for questions.

Are there any questions of staff?

I have Councilman Chapman and then I have Vice Mayor Bagley.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And I I appreciate the uh truncated presentation, but one of the things that I wanted to see and wanted the public to see was the additional options uh that staff laid out uh to the board uh for uh the different segments.

Uh there were multiple kind of options on uh road infrastructure and what that could look like.

And so uh if there's an opportunity to kind of go through those, I'd love to have a discussion and conversation about those as well.

Thank you, Councilman Chapman.

We we do not have the um options that were presented to the traffic and parking board that were not recommended, but we can certainly talk through what those options were with you all during the discussion.

Happy to do that.

So I appreciate that.

But what I would request is staff to frankly go into the online and pull up the um pull up the proposal and and go through it that way.

I do want to focus, I do want to make sure the community has a visual opportunity to see that option as well.

Okay, so why why don't we do this as staff is working to pull that up or as we're thinking through how we can get some of those visuals on the screen.

Let me pivot to some of the other uh questions.

Does that work for the team?

Okay.

Uh Vice Mayor Bagley.

Uh yeah, no, thank you, Saf for the presentation.

And and though it was said, I'll just say it again.

I this is a very truncated presentation designed in light of the the day we have ahead.

So I I think everybody here in the room knows this that have taken a deep interest in it.

But um, I I I want to be clear, there is a a much fuller, I think the presentation of traffic and parking to almost took almost an hour.

It was over an hour.

It was over an hour.

Okay.

I I might have might have fast forwarded throughput portions of it that I thought I was familiar with.

Um, but I you know, uh I I think that's just important to context here is that there was a a 90-minute presentation going over to my colleagues' point, um, uh the underlying data points and how they were put together.

Um, and we did request that there was a more abbreviated version today, um, understanding that all of us as well have had opportunities for one-on-one briefings with staff and many, many questions that have gone back and forth.

So just just some context as well uh for everybody watching.

Um, one of the questions uh that I wanted to ask, and I I I do appreciate the team that's been brought here today because I think it's reflective of of what has gone into this project.

Um I was hoping maybe um either Ms.

Carroll or Mr.

Scalise, is it Scalice?

Um, could speak to um the the there was a slide in there that sort of showed um peak hour and impacts to peak hour.

You referenced, and can y'all speak from a from a design and engineering perspective, you know, do we how do we design our roads broadly speaking, recognizing there is peak hour and then most of the day is not peak hour.

And and what I'm just trying to get at here is there are certain roads in our city that I think are overbuilt or are and as a result are really fast and sped on because they were sort of envisioning that that high peak hour demand, Eisenhower Avenue is is you know one that it's it's very hard to get people to slow down on because it's very wide and very straight.

And that was instructive to me as I've come to you know be a part of these projects.

So I was wondering if you could just speak to how do you approach the analysis of what is the correct road design, knowing that there are peak hour challenges with with the other 22 hours of the day, or you know, or 20 hours of the day.

Um I can start and then I'll invite either Ryan or Dan uh to add anything that I may have missed, but you know, generally speaking, it is a balancing act.

Um, you know, any time we're designing a roadway, first of all, we have to adhere to national design standards and analysis standards.

Um so we're not just kind of designing things willy-nilly here in Alexandria, we're following national, state uh and regional guidance and best practices and standards.

Um, in terms of how we assess um traffic operations, you're absolutely right that that uh conditions can look very, very different on a corridor at different times of day.

And so our standard practice is to evaluate the peak hour conditions.

So the the worst part of the day so that uh we have an understanding of if we were to change something on this roadway, this is when it's gonna impact people who are trying to get home from work uh or trying to get to work or whatever the peak hour may be.

It's typically an AM or a BM rush hour.

That being said, we do have to make careful consideration of what that means for the rest of the day.

Uh we are trying to design for 24 hours, not just one hour.

And so there's often some some balancing that has to happen.

Um, so if we over-design a roadway to make it operate very efficiently during the peak hour, well, that means that the rest of the day it's even more efficient than that.

And that while that may sound good, it actually invites safety issues because the more efficiently a street operates, the less traffic there is, the fewer cars there are on the road.

We saw this during COVID.

Um, people will drive faster, and that presents um major safety issues.

And so we also have to consider, you know, if we're making trade-offs and making compromises during the peak hour, what does that mean for how people use the roadway the rest of the day?

So if you know it's a question of, well, we need this this lane because it it will help the peak hour operate better.

Does that mean that the rest of the day there are not bike lanes that there are not median islands or other roadway features that are important for a whole complete street, essentially.

Um, so I'll kind of pause there and see if Ryan or Dan wanna want to add anything.

Thank you.

Um so yeah, I mean, as Alex said, I think a lot of it is also kind of dictated by policy too about how we go about our roads and and design.

I think the main thing that we always like to do with our traffic analysis in general is as Alex said, we use standards and everything is we are also kind of building in a factor of safety, which does sometimes um inflate it a little bit more.

Uh we are a little bit conservative on it.

There are other things that are taken to account when we do it.

Um it's not also just a traffic analysis that we're doing.

We're also going out in the field.

As Alex said, we're not trying to just design to like a couple hours a day.

We're also looking at the full day.

Uh when we did this study in any of our studies, uh, we do a field visit with staff and walk the corridor and watch conditions.

We have our own engineers who are doing the modeling actually out there during the peak hour to make sure that we're capturing conditions appropriately.

But in general, I mean, our analysis is, you know, sometimes factored up a little bit and uh trying to um appropriately uh measure the conditions that are happening during those times, but also balance as I was saying balancing operations versus safety.

There's a sort of teetering there.

Um, and we always like to kind of give them the impacts of those those those trade-offs too.

And by way of a follow-up, just the the grades here, um we're a city of overachievers in Alexandria, and I'm sure none of us are comfortable with B's and C's.

Um, but uh it can you kind of speak to is the goal to achieve an A grade uh in in the industry?

I mean, how how do we understand these grades and their the goals that the engineers are seeking with with these scores?

Yeah, so the short answer is no, we are not trying to achieve an A on city streets because again, an A means that it's completely free-flow operations with absolutely zero delay, which it uh is often associated with high speeds, which is counter to some of the other goals that we're trying to achieve here in the city, um, especially in urban environments.

Um, it is completely uh acceptable and common um to see peak hour intersection operations go all the way down to E or even an F.

Now that is where you know it often you often have to start talking about real trade-offs because when you know, if you have intersections being blocked and things like that, that can be that can be challenging.

But um in an urban environment such as Alexandria, we often strive for anywhere in the range of B to D or even E is perfectly acceptable traffic operations.

I I appreciate that.

And that's been one of the sort of eye-opening things, you know, since serving on council is just understanding what our what the goals are and how they look.

Um, you know, to Miss Parker, the public speaker earlier um from Old Town North, um, you know, I know that many of those uh east-west intersections fail for that reason because it so heavily favors the parkway.

And so when I saw scores that showed, you know, Slater's is a failure and and some of the other, and then understood that that's why, because we so emphasize flow, you know, throughput on the parkway.

So just to give some context to that.

Um switching gears, um, I'm gonna tap into the city attorney's office here briefly, and Miss Dubin and then any of the engineers who want to speak.

Um, I just, and again, I appreciate the brevity of the app of the presentation, but I'm gonna call out um the the ADA uh conversation only because in the hundreds of emails that this on both sides was um clearly raised.

And can we just um give a little more context to um have we analyzed sort of whether any of the proposals, the ones that you know weren't weren't adopted or or are proposed here today, um comply with or in line with, you know, federal and any other um guidance about disability access?

Um and I don't just mean parking, I just mean like the project itself.

What has been sort of the legal review and the bottom line, you know, from your office?

Uh the project recommended by the traffic and parking board does not violate any standards in the ADA.

Uh staff have been very thorough in their analysis.

They've checked with the US Access Board, which is the federal uh board that's responsible for creating uh ADA standards.

Um US Access Board was comfortable with it.

Um and the uh the redesigned parking locations provide folks with meaningful access uh to the entrance of um good look uh good shepherd Lutheran Church.

I appreciate that.

And again, I understand we're probably gonna hear a lot on that today, but I did just want to, you know, for anybody who you know is listening in and watching, it has undergone sort of a legal analysis, and then the access board was something that I wasn't familiar with until this project and of the their participation in it.

Um can we flip to the portion that includes Good Shepherd for the moment?

Here we are.

Perfect.

That's slide, yeah.

Um can staff then speak to uh and I and I'm not gonna go too in the weeds here, but I did just want to touch on it because I think all of us are interested.

Is there um have staff evaluated uh uh some other options?

And we don't have to get into them now necessarily, but um has staff evaluated and to the extent you do want to touch on them any other um uh functionally possible ways to sort of enhance the the dynamic around here.

And and what I'm getting at is the the sidewalk currently proposed to come around the corner to reach to the new locations.

Did we evaluate the the possibility of continuing that sidewalk further?

Um have we done analysis around a loading zone on either um side, Hancock or LaRay?

Yes, Vice Mayor Bagley.

Um we did do a preliminary analysis of the site conditions to understand whether extending the sidewalk all the way around the block was feasible.

There don't appear to be any major red flags that would prevent such a project from occurring.

So, you know, I I know at one point it was suggested that uh should Good Shepherd Lutheran Church desire to put um an ADA entrance on on their main entrance on Loray, uh the city could accommodate that by extending the sidewalk all the way around and then uh placing the disability spaces adjacent to that entrance.

Um additionally, there don't appear to be any barriers to establishing a loading zone on either Hancock or Lorray to accommodate any uh occasional loading activity that the church might need.

Madam Mayor.

Uh Councilman Gary.

Uh just to uh tag on to the vice mayor's um line of conversation here.

Um I did have a conversation with the church uh and they did seem very open to uh making a sidewalk all the way around.

Uh and how do I put this?

Um we are in an urban area, and I do believe in having sidewalks in places where we need to have them.

You know, a good example is what we did a couple years ago with the safe routes to to school to put the sidewalk in uh for the route to uh poke.

Um, and so I just think if we don't have a sidewalk here, if we have enough funding, we should go ahead and have the mountain put the sidewalk in.

Ultimately it's up to them whether or not they'll put in a ramp.

But um, I just wanted to throw that out there that they are amenable to uh putting extending uh sidewalks on both sides.

And as a city, I think we should be helpful facilitate that.

Yeah.

Um I I think just while while we're here, I know this isn't our deliberation point, but sometimes things come up.

Um I'm glad that the vice mayor and councilman Aguirre brought up this part of the conversation.

I think for me, what I'm thinking about is it in both ends.

I agree that you know, where we have an opportunity to expand our sidewalk infrastructure, we should be thinking about how we do that.

And so if there's a way to bring that into this project, um I know I also I think many of us had um conversations with the church, what they would need is certainty that we are we are going to come through with that.

And so I I think understanding the budget impacts and how do we build that in would be important.

I think something I would love to, when we are having our deliberation, is kind of talk through a bit more.

I I heard Miss Dubin, while the other spaces offer meaningful access, they are still at a different distance.

And so um some of the people I had an opportunity to meet with, they were traveling um not by motorized scooter or not by wheelchair, but by Kane and Walker.

And that is just a different distance.

And so um, as we think about this construction, what this looks like, I do want us to have maybe a deeper conversation at that time on what it looks like to at least maintain accessibility on on Braddock Road.

But um, I know there are gonna be more questions here.

Before I go to other people, let me let the vice mayor finish from her point of questioning.

And then I think I saw a hand from Councilman Marks.

I saw a hand from Councilman Chapman and then Councilman Alnubi.

No, thank you.

And I think I I appreciate what the mayor's getting at.

I I'm not trying to get too far into it.

What I'm just trying to do is front load a few questions here that are sort of in light of the extensive dialogue we've had on both sides, and so that as people get up to speak today and as we head into debate and discussion later, we've sort of laid the groundwork, I think, for for some of the key areas.

So just to be clear that that's where my questions are, you know, at this that stage of the process.

And um, you know, to the mayor and my colleagues' point here, I think um I I want to be clear as well, and I appreciate Councilman Gary sort of raising that the church's um openness.

To me, this isn't about putting any onus on the church to build and change their infrastructure.

So um the sidewalk conversation is a is a city-based conversation and is for me, like I and again, I'm not trying to get into deliberation, but I just wanted to clarify that that my question about extending it was not tied to some expectation on the church's part to build different infrastructure, but a recognition that there's value in extending the sidewalk for a host of reasons, um, including you know, rolling walking, you know, coming around the other side.

Um, Ms.

Carroll, and last question, then I'll I'll uh Miss Carol, you referenced um sort of uh a change uh early in the design um on East Alexandria.

And I and I actually we got a lot of messages about that, and there was some community engagement on it.

And um can you touch on, and there may not be slides on this, but are you able to touch on any other um uh my words this morning, um iterations that that the project sort of experienced along the way?

And and part of again what I'm getting at here is this has been a um iterative process um that didn't come out baked like this five months ago.

Um, and so I appreciate you touching on the East Alan East Alexandria West Alexand West Alexandria, it's an east-west change on West Alexandria.

But I just wondering, could you just highlight anywhere else in the plan that sort of from conception to delivery, there's been tweaks and modifications.

Uh absolutely, Vice Mayor Bagley.

And first, I'll just I'll just note that when we developed the original um design options that were shared with the community.

That was based on an initial round of community input that we did before the project even really got underway.

Um, so prior to actually getting in to the weeds and and creating design options, we um hosted an online feedback forum to get input from the community on what their experience was as the corridor exists today, some challenges they that they experience.

And so I just want to note that the the concept designs that we developed, of which there were several um were based off of that.

Um we had numerous multiple design options for the different corridor segments and for the different intersections that people could weigh in on.

Um in addition to the relocation of the ADA spaces and adding the additional ADA space at the church.

We had the conversations about not reversing West Alexandria Avenue.

We also um opted to retain some on-street parking on segment two um near a home that does not have a driveway on Braddock Road.

So there are about five on-street parking spaces that would be retained um adjacent to that home.

Um lastly, in our conversations with the fire department, they expressed a desire to be able to move more efficiently through the corridor, particularly under the under the bridge.

Um, and so we worked with them to include um emergency vehicle preemption at the traffic signals to address um any desires that they had to be able to move through the corridor more efficiently than they do today.

And for the benefit of sort of everyone in the room, emergency vehicle preemption at the signals means uh apologies.

Yes, it's it basically means that as an if an emergency vehicle is approaching the signal, it will trigger the traffic signal to become green, so they don't have to wait and they don't have to try to navigate a red light.

Yeah, no, I think it's just cool.

Um okay, uh I that I appreciate the list.

Just to say it back to you.

Um we've retained some spaces near homes that don't have um driveways.

We've made some EMS requested modifications, and I can use this moment to note EMS then is supportive of the current design or or is comfortable with the current design.

Yes.

Okay.

Um in East West Alexandria um changes as well are noted.

All right, I appreciate that.

I'll um I'll pause there.

Okay, I have councilwoman marks followed by Chapman, then followed by El Nuby.

As we were discussing the ADA compliance and the uh ADA spaces around Good Shepherd, I just wanted to acknowledge and appreciate the sort of broad agreement and acknowledge the importance that all of us are expressing for ADA compliance, accessibility for Good Shepherd, um, and the flexible thinking on this point.

Uh that's wonderful to see.

I also want to express an appreciation for staff in your sort of uh dispassionate and academic approach to this and your uh you know flexible approach into incorporating citizen feedback and some of our feedback before we even get to this place.

Uh so thank you for including that here.

We have this here in all of our information that was given to us in advance.

Um, and the public has that now.

Uh so thank you for for your incorporation of these things.

Uh yeah.

Thanks.

Uh Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um I'll I'll just start off on this uh current slide.

Um staff kind of looked at the alternates.

Why was there a decision for two spaces versus the one that was already there?

Um thank you for the question, Councilman Chapman.

Uh recognizing that we were um going to be removing the uh the space that is uh closest to the ADA accessible entrance, we wanted to be able to provide options.

We also heard feedback from Good Shepherd that they actually have multiple congregants who have disabilities, not just one.

And so we wanted to try to maximize the amount of accessible parking that was available for for more of their congregants rather than just one individual.

Certainly appreciate that we do have a number of uh churches and uh houses of worship that that like all of us are getting older.

Um so I certainly understand the the need for that capacity.

I think the I'll be very transparent.

I think if um I I look at an opportunity where I don't take this option for moving away from uh what we have or the distance uh from the front, uh I would definitely want to entertain an additional opportunity for additional space in front uh for ADA access.

If staff is recognizing this as a as a lack of capacity, uh I want to make sure when we get to a final vote, uh, if it is uh if those that front space remains, uh we keep with staff's position and looking at that lack of capacity and adding back not just one or keeping one space, but adding a second.

Um so I want to be very transparent about kind of why that why I'm asking that question.

Um I also want to uh make sure folks uh being the the old man on council uh make sure uh we level set with where we are and kind of how we got here.

Um because I want to make sure folks understand uh how how hard staff is not only worked at this particular project or seminary road or King Street, but all of the work that's been done uh and how frankly unique it is to be here.

Um this is uh my third appeal of uh a project like this, uh, as we all know, we know them by name of the street, uh King Street uh seminary or Braddock Road now.

Um, but uh in staff's uh uh or anybody's um thought, how many road miles do you think we have had of um bike lanes or bike facilities since we since we did King Street?

Uh would it be safe to say we've probably hundreds uh probably not that many, but how many bike lane miles we've installed?

Yes.

It's far fewer than that.

I know um I I don't know off the top of my head, but I would say under 10 miles.

And um how many uh roughly how many projects have we have we done kind of independently?

Because I and I'll ask, I'll tell you why I want to ask that question.

Um, is because most of the projects that we have do not get appealed.

Uh, and I and I want to make sure folks understand that.

This is not this is not kind of the average norm for Alexandria to appeal uh a bike lanes project.

We have not hundreds of miles, but we have lots of miles of of bike lanes and bike facilities that have not been appealed by neighbors, have not been appealed by neighborhoods or organizations or or the like.

And so I don't want folks to think that this is the regular process because as we get into these conversations, that seems to come out that oh, everything is going to be appealed.

No, it is not.

Uh traffic and parking board, if you maybe speak to that when it's time to talk, they see a lot of projects.

Not a lot of projects come back for an appeal.

So I want to understand how unique some of these situations are.

Every neighborhood is not appealing all of the bike lanes that run through their neighborhood.

Every street is not doing that.

Um, and so I want to understand and I want folks to understand the uniqueness of of where we are and how we've got here.

Um of the things that that I wanted to go back in uh looking at the parking capacity um slide, wanted to ask um, do those numbers include um the church parking lots in terms of the the capacity that's uh for those uh for that map.

Apologies, uh, Councilman Chapman.

I was trying to pull up the slide, and I think my remote might be malfunctioning.

Um, but I think I can answer your question anyway.

No, it does not include off-street parking for the churches that is on-street parking only.

Okay, I have Councilman El Nubi, uh, then Councilman Green, then Vice Mayor Back.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you, staff.

Um my first question is um I heard um a mention of field studies.

We don't just rely on models.

Um, my question is on the field study.

Was part of that field study um simulating um the proposal, like go out, shut down some of those turn lanes that we're gonna take away and see if the actual results in the field match the results from the model.

Uh councilman Alnubi, no.

The the field work involved um uh examining the existing conditions, observing traffic, observing walking and biking patterns.

Um, if you're asking if we did a pilot, we did not do a pilot.

Gotcha.

Thank you for that.

Um, and the reason I asked that is um, you know, as an engineer myself, you know, I'm trained that sometimes what works on paper doesn't necessarily work in real life, and a lot of times you have to do those field studies to be able to verify what's in the model, because a lot of times in the model there are um assumptions that go into the model, and sometimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong.

So I appreciate that answer.

My second question is um the city's 2022 high injury network.

Um can you explain um to the public what that is?

Yes, Councilman Alnuby.

So um, as part of the city's vision zero work, which is essentially our traffic safety program, um, we develop what's called a high injury network.

Most um cities with traffic safety plans have something similar that basically looks at um past trends in citywide crash data um and identifies key intersections and corridor segments um where there have been a uh regularity of fatal and severe crashes.

And so what that helps us do in terms of our vision zero program is be able to prioritize projects, recognize where um our hotspots are, where the most fatal and severe crashes are occurring, um, so that we can prioritize our work accordingly.

Thank you for that.

Um and my understanding is Raddock Road was not one of those corridors.

Is that correct?

No, it is not.

Thank you.

Um, switching gears a little bit.

Section um talking about the segment two specifically.

Um is that segment going to be protected bike lanes or just paint?

Um, as of right now, we are showing these as paint only bike lanes.

Um, as I mentioned during the presentation, this is the narrowest part of the project corridor, this segment two.

Um it is quite constrained.

And so we don't have the space available to be able to provide the same um buffer space that would be present in segment one and segment three.

Um, and that is typically where vertical barriers are placed is in the buffer space next to the bike lane.

Um, here we do not have the that buffer space.

Um, that being said, that is something that we could continue to explore through detailed design.

I know other communities in the region, including Arlington and DC and Baltimore, um, do selectively put vertical delineation, so flexible bollards on the bike lane line as a as a uh uh attempt at sort of striking a balance there between having um a protected bike lane and not quite having the space to do the full the full version.

Got it.

Thank you.

Um in our briefing, you mentioned a word that stuck with me about the NACTO standard.

He said it's the gold standard.

Do you mind explaining to the public what the NACTO standard is?

And how's it the gold standard?

Yes.

So um NACTO is the National Association of City Transportation Officials.

It is an organization of cities that comes together to which Alexandria belongs, um, to set best practices um and guidelines for roadway design.

Um they have something called the um the NACTO bike guide, which sets some guidelines for for bike lane design.

Um we adhere to this guidance and we follow it as much as is feasible.

Um they all they include they're very um um aspirational um guidelines and that they as you said they are the gold standard of you know wider bike lanes, more protection, and that is what we strive to do um in in every project.

And so um this pro we follow NACTO guidelines.

We also follow there's also the um American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, which is less of a guideline and more of a standard that is a national standard that we are required to follow.

Um so we align to the project with both NACTO and Ashto guidelines.

Go ahead.

Um, my last uh question is um to follow up on that.

So, but NACTO's um recommendation um says that um to for the bike lane to be comfortable for all ages and abilities, it has to be a protected bike lane.

Um, if it's on a segment like that, segment two of Braddock, is that correct?

Um it doesn't have to be a protected bike lane.

It is recommended that it be a protected bike lane to be comfortable for all ages and abilities.

Um, however, there is flexibility in the design guidance that allows for painted bike lanes in constrained conditions with certain traffic volumes in this segment aligns with those guidelines.

Got it.

Thank you for that.

Um, those are my questions for now.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Okay.

And um, Councilman Green, I apologize.

I cut Councilman Chapman off.

He he said he had a whole list and I just jumped.

Oh yeah.

So I'm gonna go uh back to Councilman Patton to finish.

And I will check with each of you to make sure you've gone through your list.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I appreciate that.

Um, one of the questions I have for staff and in our briefing, and then I'll raise this here um back on the slide with um community feedback.

I did want to separate out if staff uh could provide me the details of separated out um understanding, because I think when when all of us see uh results of surveys, we we not just want to understand kind of the uh the positive, but our our neutral folks and kind of where they stand is always an interesting uh way to look at things.

So do we have understanding of how many folks just felt positive versus uh negative or just positive, and then we'll we'll take from that uh the other data.

Um Councilman Chapman, we do.

I don't have the number handy, but I can pull it up during the conversation and have that ready for you in a little bit.

Appreciate it.

Um the other things that that is um interesting to me is is the as we look at corridors.

Um one of the things I've taken away from our conversations about Eisenhower is how that uh the various parts of that corridor operate differently as you get into Carlisle versus West Eisenhower.

Obviously, um development uh is a key piece of that um or or not, as it were.

Um, but I also want to understand um kind of safety issues around a corridor and where in particular um within this corridor we have specific safety, you know, the the bigger safety issues within this corridor.

I wanna uh respectful of staff, I do want to uh call out the conversations we had around seminary, where much of this is the discussion was on the part that we that got brought to council was safety issues when we knew there were larger safety issues west of the project area.

Um and I want to be very specific around that, where we talked around safety issues uh in one part of the corridor, but a whole nother part of the corridor, council frankly had to come back later um and have additional work and additional money spent um to uh address issues in in this very area.

So uh I for the purposes of that for the purposes of this conversation, I I really want to understand specifically as it breaks down to these segments as we have them lifted out, and I believe this is in our document materials.

Our main concern or the main data related concerns are in which corridor, if you had to prioritize them, which ones not saying that safety is not a not an issue everywhere.

I certainly understand that, but I don't want it to be understood uh as it was in past conversations uh on other parts of other roadways, that the entire area is one giant safety concern.

Thank you, Councilman Chapman.

If I understand your question correctly, you're asking which segment has the highest safety concerns.

Um from a pedestrian and bicycle safety standpoint, certainly segment one has the highest.

Um it is four lanes, uh people walking, kids walking to George Washington Middle School or having to cross four lanes of traffic, um, which is a very high risk scenario that we try to mitigate in a lot of locations around the city, because often one driver stops and the next driver does not.

Um that being said, um, there are safety risks throughout the corridor.

Um we recognize that um there are a lot of folks who are avoiding parts of the corridor precisely because they feel um unsafe using it.

And so we don't want to discount that either um that you know, Brad the segment one is such a hub because of the trail and Braddock Road and everything that people are going to converge there and those safety issues are gonna manifest much more clearly there.

Um, but safety risks do exist um on segments two and three as well, and have been also identified um by the Virginia Department of Transportation as safety needs in addition to segment one.

At the same level as segment one, and so or different levels, I'm assuming.

Give me one moment.

Sure.

So um VDOT puts out um a statewide transportation plan called VTrans, um, which basically identifies various types of transportation needs across the state in different categories.

So like congestion mitigation, pedestrian access, transit access, things like that.

Um so it identified a need for bicycle access and pedestrian access on all three segments, um, and then pedestrian safety specifically on segment one.

Thank you.

Um segment one, one of the things that I know we've been done in this project is kind of the changes in in roadway design, particularly with the changing of the lane.

Um we do have other uh I guess four-lane roads here in the city.

Um, in particular, I'm thinking about Eisenhower uh Avenue where we've installed Hawk signals.

Um I want to understand kind of what the philosophy is between um using a hock signal there and not recommending um lane changes or uh lane deletions versus here.

Yeah, um that that's a great question.

I will note on Eisenhower Avenue that will likely be talking about the eastern end where the Hawk signal is.

I mean, that is likely going to be a future project where we where we re-examine some safety issues there because people cross at that hock signal and people don't stop for them, and that that's problematic.

Um, whenever we're looking at um uh uncontrolled crossing locations, which means location crosswalks where there's not a stop sign or a traffic signal, we follow federal highway administrative administration guidance on improving safety at uncontrolled crossing locations, and there's a variety of treatments that are available and appropriate depending on the number of lanes, the number of traffic volumes, the the types of lanes that are available, whether there's a median present, things like that.

Um, so it really depends on the context.

I will say though, that the roadway geometry is the biggest determinant of traffic safety rather than leaving the roadway geometry as is and just slapping up a sign, um, because often people will ignore um the signs as we see at the PTO crossing on Eisenhower and even here at the um Braddock Road Metro Station Crossing, we have the um flashing um pedestrian beacons that are often ignored.

Um, and we heard that over and over and over again through the community engagement.

And so what we want to do is try to make the roadway design safe by design and make it more intuitive for drivers to drive to operate their vehicles in a safe manner and for other users of the roadway to behave safely rather than leaving it as is and then hoping a sign fixes it.

I will say the other consideration here, because a um uh Hawk signal was um uh brought up as a potential idea years ago in in this area, and one of the constraints that we have here is the bridge.

Um Hawk signals require a mast arm that goes over the roadway.

And so if you're going under the bridge, you do not have enough sight distance to see a hock signal.

Thank you.

That's super helpful.

Um I just forgot my other question.

Uh uh one of the the concerns I've had with um past appeals was kind of capacity, roadway capacity.

Uh and so as we talk about uh the future of what Braddock Road uh is going to look like as we as a number of people have talked about this as a uh a main east-west corridor.

Um, you know, has staff done um kind of research or thoughts around the amount of capacity that we'll probably see in the next 10, 20 uh 30 years as we certainly understand North Old Town as a developing uh continuously developing part of our community.

Uh yes, Councilman Chapman.

So in the traffic analysis, um, we applied a growth factor to all of the traffic volumes.

So we overestimated um the traffic volumes before we did the analysis.

Historical trends actually show that traffic volumes on this section of Braddock are declining or stagnant.

Um but in an effort to be a little bit more conservative, we applied um a growth factor to this area.

Um I will also note too that a lot of the the uh demand for for vehicle lanes and capacity and everything like that, a lot of that is based around the environment that people are operating in.

So vehicle trips are gonna be much higher on a street that has no transit access, no bike lanes, no sidewalks than an area next to a metro station where people have options for for different ways um to get around.

And so we we did consider that and we feel confident that Braddock would be able to continue to serve drivers and other road users with the proposed configuration.

Thank you.

Councilman Green.

Thank you, madam mayor.

Um I guess while we're on this slide, uh, I'll stay at this one, but then I had a question about the ADA access for Good Shepherd as well.

Um, but for segment one, um, I guess could you explain to me uh a little bit more about in and as I walked uh this area with um multiple groups um one of the bikers coming to meet with me almost got hit as I was you know standing there meeting with them.

So this this area um just very treacherous.

But I I have questions about um why the parking was not necessarily taken away um on that corridor and the left turn going into 7-Eleven and the left turn going out of 7 that that specific I have questions about that specific area there.

If I could get some background on that.

Uh thank you, councilwoman.

Let me get to the slide.

I think a visual could potentially help here.

So you're talking about the parking in front of Lena's, why that wasn't um, you know, a couple of reasons.

Uh I would just say in general, if we had more roadway space to operate with on segments two and three, we would not be removing parking.

This is a question about trade-offs.

Um, and if we had room to fit parking and bike lanes and protected bike lanes along the entire corridor, we would do that.

I think in this particular section, there is enough space to have both.

And we didn't want to place an undue burden on the businesses by removing that on street parking that really didn't need to be removed.

Um one second, Councilman.

Uh Councilman Green, I think you said you had another question as it related to ADA access.

Uh I do, but I was um the left turn out of or left turn going into 7-11, left turn going out.

Apologies.

Um worries.

You you did ask me that.

I completely forgot to answer it.

Yeah, like oh no, I'm just carried.

Um, yeah, I we we have definitely heard that that that is a challenge um, both for people walking and for people biking as they're walking across the driveway for for 7-Eleven.

Um, there are options there to improve safety.

Um, access management is a really important tool for addressing those kinds of concerns.

But again, that's a question about trade-offs.

So, what that could look like is extending the median island or the median where there's a median gap there to basically make it so that there's no gap so that people can't turn left going westbound from Braddock into 7-Eleven.

But that's again another trade-off where that could potentially create access issues for people who are heading that direction and want to get in the 7-Eleven.

And then are they going to go up to the intersection and make a U-turn?

And does that introduce other issues?

And so it it's all a it's all a balancing act.

I think with the proposed plan, the additional pavement markings for people biking could help raise more awareness that there are people crossing there.

But I think to be honest, that's gonna continue to be um a challenging area unless we were to completely close that median.

All right, thank you.

And back to 88 access um for good shepherd really quickly.

Um could I have that slide back up?

And thank you to Pastor Kate and the congregants who've walked me um around the church area numerous times.

Um, but to get a greater understanding.

Um so if if we were to if we were to move the spaces, and I know we talked about sidewalk access.

Um, is there were concerns from the congregants that some places couldn't accommodate the sidewalk access with having um there was sewer access on one side?

Are we confident that if we were to move forward with moving the spaces that sidewalks could be effectively put in?

Yes.

We are.

Yes.

Okay.

And I guess has the the church agreed to, you know, they would indeed put um utilize their monies to put a ramp on that backside, or that's just up to no, they have not.

They have not.

Okay.

That is completely up to them.

If they were to decide that they wanted to go that route, we would certainly work with them on extending the sidewalk all the way around.

And what would be the estimated costs to do the sidewalks and everything included?

At a very, very high level estimate, just to extend the sidewalk around, we're probably looking at, I would say 80 to 100,000.

It's a fairly, which I will say is is very cheap in the world of sidewalk projects.

It seems like a lot of money.

Um, but uh we have installed sidewalks of similar length in other parts of the city.

There aren't any major grade issues or challenges or utilities that would that would require relocating that could make the project more expensive.

Um, to put it kind of plainly, it's more of like a drop-in sidewalk.

You just drop the comp drop the concrete in.

Okay.

All right, great.

Thank you.

And just quick clarifying question, Ms.

Carroll, is that for the current extension of sidewalks, or is that what for all the way around?

That's for all the way around.

Okay.

Um, I had a few quick questions and then I will try and move us to the next part.

Uh so the first thing, uh, it was brought up around EMS review.

I know one of the things we've talked about just as we think about our EMS fleet is just, you know, the types of vehicles that our emergency services providers use, they're changing.

Um, when we are doing this type of review, are we looking at it just for the fleet and the infrastructure we have now?

Or are we also paying attention to how um those vehicles might change over time and the type of space that they need in order to navigate our roads?

Um, the fire department provides transportation staff guidance on the size of of vehicles that we're required to analyze as part of this process.

So I um based off of that, I would assume it's the vehicles that they are using or are planning to use in the near future.

Thank you.

My next question was related to parking um and the calculations around parking utilization.

Can you speak to what is the methodology that we use to do that calculation?

And does that take into account driveways, curb cuts, utilities, places where places where you like you really just couldn't park a vehicle?

Uh yes, thank you, Mayor Gaskin.

So the parking methodology, um, we collected parking counts on multiple days at multiple different times.

We send field techs out into the field to hand measure um the available curb space and then tally up the total available curb space, and then they divide that by 20 feet, which is a typical length of a parking space of an on-street parking space.

It does not include any no parking areas, such as near fire hydrants, um, near uh intersections, near any other near driveways near any other no parking zone.

I will note that um it all it doesn't include the driveways.

However, people are allowed to park in front of their own driveway.

So we did not count those spaces where people could theoretically park in front of their own driveway if they wanted to, but those were not counted in the total.

Okay.

So if I understand correctly, so it wasn't just an aerial view.

It was both an aerial and somebody also coming out and doing hand counts.

But as part of that hand count, we don't do that initial separate um subtraction of space where you would not be able to park.

Um the so it is a combination of field text going out and and aerial measurement, and they tally up the total available curb space and then divide that by this the size of a of a parking space.

Okay.

Um, and then hold on, what's one second?

Let me let me secure.

Um, Councilman Chapman has a clarifying question on this one.

No, I'm just trying to understand the answer.

I don't, I don't think the no offense, I don't think the answer actually answered your question.

So I'm trying to understand because I appreciate the question, but I don't understand how the answer correlated with that question.

Which which part of the answer?

Um I guess what I what I took away was driveway driveways are not included at all.

They're not measured in the field, like they skip over driveways when they're when they're measuring the available curb space in the field.

Those are not included in any total.

Except okay, so now yeah, I had it before, but I can find out but except for the driveways where somebody can park in front of their own driveway.

No, no, no, no, no.

Sorry, I made that confusing.

I would try to add a caveat.

They go out in the field, they measure the available curb space, which does not include driveways.

What I was trying to say is that that might actually result in an underestimate of the available parking spaces because practically speaking, people can park in front of their own driveways.

But we didn't count those.

Okay.

Does that make sense?

Yes, no, I'm tracking.

I'm sorry about that.

I think when I was on my community walk, some of the concern was that are we just taking sort of the length of a side um an area and then dividing it by 20.

What I wanted to understand is how are we factoring in the unique dynamics of the street and where and where not?

So I I I can hear that now.

And I appreciate both folks raising it.

Did you have a clarifying on this as well?

Um, Councilman Newby.

Uh so on that point, um, what you used is a linear method, correct?

And can you explain the difference between a linear method and a geometric method?

Because my understanding, the method we used here is a linear method, which could count segments like say between two driveways that's too small to have a car park there.

But when you add that to other segments like this throughout the whole area, that could result in overestimating, correct?

Can you explain that um better than me, please?

Sorry.

Thank you, Councilman Anubi.

Um, yes.

So what the field tech um team did is they went out and measured the curbs, the available curb space, they got the total cumulative amount for that side of the street on that particular block and divided it by 20.

Um, so it is a linear method.

Um, and what that could mean is that if there is a a space between two driveways that is say 35 feet, if you were to count that in isolation, that would be one parking space because it only fits one full 20-foot space.

However, with the method that we use, that would be going towards the cumulative total that would then be divided by 20.

That being said, um, we did go back and evaluate based on the alternate method as well, um, what we found and went street by street.

And what we found was that there could be a difference of three up to three percent in the total calculation of available parking spaces.

I will also note that sorry, what's the alternate method?

Is that geometric or what's the alternative?

That was the geometric method.

Yes.

Um, and so that could result in a difference of up to 3% of available parking spaces calculated, but that um that method is actually even more uh is probably too conservative.

And the the exact right answer is probably somewhere in the middle of those two methods.

And the reason I say that is because you know, if you go street by street, and let's use that example again of there being 35 feet of space between two driveways, um, based on the first method, that could potentially that would be added to the total, then divided by 20 with the second method, it would only count as one space in theory.

In reality, people's cars are like 15 feet long in many cases, and two people can and are observed parking in those spaces.

And so while we might be counting it as one space, practically speaking, two people are parking there.

And that was observed across the project area, where theoretically the number of spaces was lower than the practical number of spaces that were actually being utilized by people because they park more efficiently than what we're assuming.

And that's what that was, if I remember from my briefing because of the maneuvering space.

It is it is the maneuvering space.

So what you're talking about, yes, that's a great point.

So between two driveways, you have a lot more space to maneuver into a parallel parking space than you do, say on a very long stretch of block where you're having to back in and do do your thing.

But if you have a driveway space available, you can use that space to actually maneuver into the spot.

So the 20 feet length assumption of a parking lane is not just assuming the length of the vehicle, it's also accounting for the maneuvering space that is required to get into that space.

And what we found is that because of the presence of driveways, people actually don't need as much space to maneuver.

So they can fit more vehicles than what we're theoretically assuming.

Got it.

Thank you.

And part of why, and then I see another question on this one.

Part of why I wanted to ask this is at the crux of many other questions we got, and for the appeals, parking is going to be a part of that.

And I think what I'm taking away is that there were four different methods used.

There was the linear method, there was a geometric method, there was aerial view pictures, and then there are also field counts.

And so in each of those, we are pulling in data from different types of methodologies to be able to get what is the most complete picture that we can get.

Although in each of those, there are trade-offs between how much they will produce and that the right number is somewhere in the middle or around um the combination of each of those.

Is that kind of a good summary?

That's what there were multiple methods from each of what the data tells, which the industry tells us are the right types of tools to be using this.

Yes.

Okay, that's helpful for me to understand.

Like I had a clarifying on parking from councilman marks.

Oh, it was not a parking.

Oh, well, then I will come back to you.

Any um Vice Mayor Bagley.

Yeah, and and I appreciate what the mayor just did there, which is um what what I had asked to follow up on.

The the methodology linear isn't is an accepted industry standard methodology.

Yes.

And I assume when you study it and implement it, there's probably asterisk somewhere that speaks to its variance rate, the an accepted variance rate.

Yes.

Okay.

And what I want to highlight too is this notion of three quarters of a space, a space and a half.

You know, as a member of council, we get weird numbers like that all the time.

We approve things that have a 0.8 parking spot requirement.

You can't build 80% of a space.

Ryan, I made I made him laugh.

Um, but um but to that end, I mean, again, like for for anybody who's sort of um drilling in on this particular appeal today, you know, in this one mile of road, hearing things like a space and a half sounds like, well, that's not real.

But we hear numbers like that, you know, in in almost every sort of um planning and zoning design process that we consider.

We we hear off uh off clean numbers, and we do expect, and this model expects to be some models are more conservative, some models are more generous.

And I appreciate my colleagues sort of separating out the two, you know, walking us through each, but I think what your answer did was drew out they you're you are conscious of the overestimation in your subsequent analysis on the recommendation.

Is that a fair statement?

Yes, okay.

Um the the other thing, I say this is more of a comment, so I will hold it till deliberation, but but thanks for clarifying that.

Okay.

And then saying, um, and then one more in parking, and then I have two other quick ones.

Um, you mentioned that staff went out on multiple days to do the field testing and counts related to parking.

Were any of those days on weekends?

Yes, they were on Saturday evening and Sunday morning as part of the formal um parking tally, the parking study.

Um, we also went out informally on multiple occasions on the weekends just to observe parking.

And during those informal um observations, was that during the Saturday day?

Yes.

Okay, thanks.

Um, my other question, you mentioned that uh segment three, you talked about that's a little bit wider.

Do you just have how how wide exactly?

Bear with me one moment.

So many numbers.

40 feet, 40 feet.

Thank you, Dan.

I'm sorry, okay.

40 feet.

And um, and if I'm just trying to compare another street that's about the same width.

Many asking is like we're gonna be doing some changes to these streets.

And I think sometimes it's just like when we talked about the snowstorm, it was helpful to visualize Duke and being stuck on Duke.

And I think we're all navigating many different roads as we're gonna talk about potentially chopping up 40 feet.

What yeah.

King Street, I think is a good example west of um, actually west and east of Russell Road, west of old town and and within Old Town is a very clear example.

Similar dimensions.

Thank you.

And then last question from me.

Um, one of the things in your opening slide was you talked about kind of what's in it for each type of um user of the street.

And for drivers, you talked about easier trans, sorry, I'm trying easier transitions at intersections.

Can you just um maybe take a picture of one of the intersections and explain a little bit, like as a driver, what what is the benefit?

What is that?

What does that mean?

Yeah.

So I've pulled up the example of the Braddock Road and Commonwealth Avenue intersection.

So if you look at the existing condition here, um let's say look at the westbound direction heading into the intersection, you have the dedicated left turn lane, and then you have the through and the right lane.

Most the the vast majority of people of drivers who are going through this intersection are going straight or turning right.

Um if you want to make that maneuver to go straight, it can be a little counterintuitive because you actually have to get out of the main travel lane and then get over into the right lane to continue straight through the intersection.

And you'll notice that in this particular scenario, there is on um on-street parking right there.

And then so if that on-street parking is being utilized, that blocks through traffic from being able to position themselves correctly in the lane.

So there's a couple different things there where it's just a very awkward jog at at all, really all of these intersections to have to get over to the right in order to go straight, which is counter to what most people feel they should be doing.

Um, and it doesn't align well with the with the other side of the intersection.

Thank you.

No, it's helpful to see it in individual and just see all of the potential conflicts.

Um, because I also know when we talk about our complete street policy, we're thinking about all users.

And how do we so I think it's important to be very clear on what those different benefits are.

Let this time, let me ask this of my colleagues are there any additional clarifying questions, knowing that we will have a second time to ask staff questions.

I know staff is also working on pulling up the other pictures, and we'll do that at the end when we have that additional points over there right now.

Councilman Marks.

I would just like to ask one sort of zoom out question while we have the experts here.

Uh, all of you know that I was recently sworn in.

So I've been getting to know all of our staff departments, and it's been a real pleasure getting to uh know these folks up here and being briefed on this project and other transportation environmental services projects.

Um, so we have a lot of master's degrees up here.

We have a lot of people uh who've spent a lot of time leading transportation in other cities.

Um, we've got, you know, published academics on multimodal transportation planning curriculum.

Um, so while I have you here and we have a couple of minutes, uh as I understand it, and and maybe the room would benefit from understanding it.

You know, we've we started our complete streets project in 2014.

We've got the bicycle and pedestrian master plan in 2016, we've got the EAP, we've got Vision Zero in 2017, the George Washington Middle School Safe Roots project, which is important to me.

I have a middle school student who does traverse this corridor all the time, and uh, you know, a bunch of 14-year-old boys on bikes in this area is is of very specific concern to me.

Uh what I'm trying to understand here, big picture is the origin story of this project.

So one of your initial slides showed all of the criteria that this project meets.

So this seems to be a project that was designed for specific reasons to accomplish specific goals.

And I'm wondering if you can just briefly share with us the origin story of this project.

Where did it come from?

And then also how does it play into the next step?

What is the larger vision that this particular project connects?

Thank you, Councilwoman Marks.

Um, so I mean, as this slide shows, this project comes from not just one plan, but many plans.

And in some plans, it's called out specifically, and in other plans, it's very general citywide guidance for how we design streets.

So, for example, from the Alexandria Mobility Plan, there are a number of policies that that guide what we do on streets like Braddock Road.

And one of our key goals from that plan is to build a safe, comfortable, connected walking and biking network.

So this project is directly in support of that.

It also calls for um increasing access to transit and reducing barriers to accessing transit, particularly our regional high capacity transit.

Um, additionally, in the Alexandria Mobility Plan, there is a citywide proposed bicycle network that includes Braddock Road.

So Braddock Road is called out specifically as part of that.

As far as Vision Zero goals goes, Vision Zero is a more high-level plan.

It doesn't get into specific projects, but it establishes these principles for how we design streets and how we design for safety, and we're taking proactive measures and we're evaluating risk and we're focusing on high high risk locations and things like that.

So it aligns with that.

And same thing with the complete streets policy.

The environmental action plan doesn't call out Braddock Road in particular.

Again, it's it's more of like a high-level strategy plan for how we reduce our environmental impact, but a key part of it is increasing the availability and attractiveness and use of sustainable modes of travel um to reduce our carbon emissions like walking and biking and taking transit.

And then the George Washington Middle School safe routes to uh school walk audit that we did um a few years ago called out specific recommendations that are reflected in this plan.

Council Millennium, if I could also just respond to that very briefly.

I was not here for the origin story, so um I appreciate what this slide depicts.

I would think though, based on my experience in doing transportation in other cities, um, that what I'd like to share is we're in an urban environment.

This is a city, and in cities, people are less car dependent and use all sorts of modes to get around.

So we are trying to accommodate uh transit, cycling, walking, people pushing strollers, people walking their dogs, people in wheelchairs or people with disabilities, and those are very complex environments in which to operate and design.

And so this uh redesign of Braddock Road is taking to account the multitude of things and people that we're trying to serve.

And I think this is probably an example that we'll want to try to duplicate throughout the city, different designs, outcomes.

But truly what we're trying to do is design roadways for all the users in a very dense urban environment.

And that's what this is trying to do.

Thank you.

And so um my next and final question, promise, is you know, we have a lot of people here to comment today.

We've we've received a lot of citizen feedback, we've taken a lot of walks, um, we've received a lot of emails uh and done a lot of internal research on our own about this.

But as I'm looking at this slide and as I'm hearing about all of these plans in these years, you know, you all are the institutional knowledge, the long-term sort of uh bird's eye view of these projects.

And what I'm seeing on the macro level is at least a decade of interest in pursuing this mobility plan.

And I'm wondering if it's possible.

I don't think it is, but I'm I would like to lift up and acknowledge the hundreds of Alexandrians who have participated in advocating for these projects and the man hours, uh, the person hours uh that have gone into the meetings and the commission meetings um and everything that have gotten us to here.

So, however, you know, uh whatever we wind up doing with this, uh I would just like to sort of lift up that this is not a capsule of a project.

This is not one thing that that staff has sort of um come up with on their own.

This is the product of of at least a decade.

Is that accurate?

Yes.

Of thought um and hundreds of individual participants that created these individual plans leading to the culmination of uh this action and others that will connect into the future.

So this is future planning.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, I'm gonna go last two and then moving us forward.

So uh Vice Mayor Bagley, Councilman Chapman.

Um, I wanted to uh to this end and sort of standardized practice across um projects.

The kind of um simulation and piloting that um Councilman Alnuby asked about.

Did we do that on Mill Road prior to installing Mill Road?

No.

Did we do that on Van Dorn?

No.

Did we do that on Holland?

No.

Did we do it on King?

No.

Did we do it on seminary?

No.

So it's not our standard practice to pilot or simulate these projects prior to execution?

No.

And has the modeling on those projects generally borne out their forecasting?

Yes.

Thank you.

Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Meriton.

Um, I want to kind of go back to my earlier comments about kind of the the broad look at this, and I appreciate this slide, but I also want to make sure we understand when we are doing plans like this, it is not necessarily uh it is kind of high level because you know the daily work of the work of these plans is done by our staff.

Um, but as policymakers, we have a process when when someone comes with an appeal that we can look at that.

Uh, we can look at that, we can accept the appeal.

Um, and it while uh some folks may say that now tears down what we've done with the plan, um, it it does not because the goals of that overall plan are still enacted.

Um, regardless of what we do here, we will still have some type of network uh within this corridor.

And we'll have be making our way again to a broader corridor.

As we look at vision zero, we are looking at the assessment of what we do in different neighborhoods and with different policies.

And as we look at uh what we realize with our environmental action plan, I think that the challenge for council continues to be how to execute different plans and what happens when we don't uh hit on all the pieces of a plan.

Uh there are various plans that we do.

Uh we just uh approved an Alex Forward plan.

And if uh to the manager, if Mr.

Manager, if we don't hit all uh all of the goals of that plan, is that plan an abject failure?

No.

Um and so if we don't hit all the goals of each of these plans, it is not an abject failure.

I think we need to realize that.

Um we've talked about that when we have appeals, uh, how uh the work of a traffic and parking board is not uh now negated because uh council did not accept something.

I think all of us have been here on council when we deviated from uh something that an advisory board brought to us or another board uh brought to us, uh, if if you have it.

That that can happen uh on council.

And so uh I don't want folks to say or think that because uh something does not reach a certain level of expectation uh in the execution of these plans, it is now null and void.

Um we know that every neighborhood, every street is different.

Um and as the director of tests said, uh, we are gonna have to look at different things in different areas when we try to complete a complete streets policy.

What does that look like for every neighborhood or every section of every neighborhood?

Uh we realize that, and I think that is something that we do need to keep top of mind.

Uh, we are going to have to be flexible as we try to complete these plans because every inch of our city is not the same.

Um, and it it cannot be uh addressed the same way.

Okay, so at this time I'm gonna move us to our next portion because if you're keeping track, we're only at item two of nine sections of this.

So at this point, we are going to go to our first appellant.

Um, I will invite them to, I think um, yeah, staff.

I would say staff can stay, um, just in case in case there's questions.

But if anyone needs to go to the bathroom or something like that, we'll make that happen.

We will be using the podium.

Um, so the appellate, the person who's speaking for the appellant is able to come to this podium over here.

They will have 10 minutes, and then for my colleagues, you'll have an opportunity to then um ask questions.

So, with that, our first appellate is um the appeal for Anna Frame, and it is going to be presented by Carrie Hagram.

It's fine.

It's always said wrong.

Hi, how are you?

Can you hear is that uh there.

Okay.

Mayor Gaskins, Vice Mayor Bagley, members of the Alexandria City Council, thank you for your time today.

Do I have a way to change the slides or is somebody else doing that?

Pause my time.

I reclaim not in court, but I just thought of that.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

Oh that was the first slide.

You tell me.

See if we can go for it.

Okay, perfect.

Hi, I'm gonna start over.

I'm gonna claim my 13 seconds.

Um, I even get it back.

Great.

Now you make a guess.

Okay, Mayor, Mayor Gaskins, Vice Mayor Bagley, members of the Alexandria City Council, thank you for your time today.

My name is Carrie Pergram.

I'm here as part of the movement appealing the traffic and parking boards decision from February 23rd.

I'm speaking as a representative of Anna Frame's petition.

Um, she's a resident of West Masonic View in the Rosemont neighborhood of Alexandria.

Um three speakers are joining me today.

They will detail the negative unintended consequences of this decision on Braddock Road itself.

But what I want to tell you about today is the impact of this choice in the streets off Braddock Road.

This may seem strange since the changes are happening on Braddock Road, but this main artery through the heart of Rosemont has an impact on all the streets and their residents surrounding it.

Before anyone categorizes why we are appealing this decision, I want you to know we support the core goals if this project was drawn up for safety reasons.

Safer crossings, better pedestrian visibility, safer access to schools and metro, and improvements for people walking, driving, biking, and using mobility devices.

But our concern is the city is ignoring these legitimate safety improvements and presenting us with just bike lanes.

Because nowhere in this plan are the additional safety improvements found.

All we see is contentious bike lane design that has not been justified with Braddock specific evidence.

Ms.

Frame wrote in her appeal, we oppose reducing the number of vehicle lanes and elimination of parking along Braddock Road between Russell Road and Mount Vernon, as Braddock Road is a busy major route for emergency vehicles as well as cars.

Elimination of turn lanes will slow traffic and lead drivers to use smaller neighborhood streets to avoid the Braddock intersections, making smaller streets less safe.

Many bikers use various smaller streets in this neighborhood to avoid busy routes like Braddock Road.

Increased traffic on side streets will not help them.

Numerous churches and residents will be negatively affected daily while traffic and safety worsen right outside their doors.

Let's focus on what this decision will do to the streets connecting and surrounding Braddock Road.

This is not an argument about convenience.

This is about real safety concerns for small streets around Braddock Road.

We are really a triangle, hemmed in if you're trying to head east or south by the railroad tracks.

The geography already limits how we get in, around, and out of our neighborhood.

The TPB has recommended removing turn lanes from Braddock Road heading west onto Mount Vernon Avenue north and south and removing the left turn lane from Braddock Road heading east to go north on Mount Vernon.

This is a busy intersection that falls under the safe routes to school plan, but taking away turn lanes won't make it safer.

It will counter this idea because you will have longer timed lights, meaning more traffic, more annoyed drivers who we know when they sit, tend to act out by taking shortcuts and then driving recklessly when they have open space again.

It will also create more drivers heading down Ramsey, Little, Wayne, Myrtle, and Spring Streets, looking for room to drive.

We know these roads don't go through, but these pass-through drivers do not.

We see it all the time when West Street is backed up due to Route 1 and Beltway delays.

We aren't an isolated area.

They treat us like we are a group of streets for people going beyond.

It's our reality.

In addition, Braddock Road from the West is already backed up, usually two blocks to Little Street during the evening rush.

Bike lanes won't alleviate traffic.

They will add to it.

The removal of turn lanes into the neighborhood also impacts those of us who live here and use those turn lanes multiple times a day to get to and from home.

Waiting for a four-direction timed light will add to time sitting in traffic, leading to more pollution.

You will hear today that these bike lanes will alleviate traffic, but the city has not provided accurate data to make this point.

Common sense says removing lanes adds to traffic backups.

Moving west on Braddock, the same turn lane removal concerns remain.

The TPB maps show removal of the turnlanes from Commonwealth Avenue onto Braddock in each direction.

But our lives are not static.

We live in connected neighborhoods and need to come and go from them.

Hundreds of cars use these turns.

Radiating traffic outwards because of changes to Braddock Road won't create streets that better serve the people and community.

They will foster frustration and aggravation.

An additional concern for the residents of the streets off Braddock Road was the missed opportunity to add any additional.

I think I'm off there.

Ask any additional crosswalks along the road.

We care about all safety, and we were disappointed there were no additional crossings added at Ramsey at Little at Wayne, at Lori, at Hancock.

All places where pedestrians must cross illegally or make the choice to walk very far out of the way to the current crossings at Mount Vernon, Commonwealth, and Russell.

This is a deficiency of the plan and one that is glaring if this is truly about safety for all.

I know you don't want to hear about parking, but it's an issue that cannot be ignored.

Off Braddock Road are hundreds of residents without dedicated off-street parking and many families with more than one car.

We pay for city zone stickers, which are rarely enforced, meaning more cars on the streets.

Residents use their cars for errands to get kids to sports, to get the dog to the vet for personal reasons, for doctors' appointments, and because of private reasons.

Adding to the already strained parking availability is a burden on off Braddock residents.

The data does not match the reality of this plan.

Not on Braddock Road and not for the streets off Braddock Road.

Ask some of the neighbors who have spoken out against this plan.

Chuck lives on West Oak Street, five blocks from the corner of Braddock and Russell.

He's an avid biker who opposes the city plan because he knows there are much safer and Carmro residential roads nearby that he already uses.

Chuck is also a transportation analyst who questions the validity of the city's city's traffic modeling.

He knows that modeling just Braddock and its major intersections is tantamount to a fool's errand.

We all know traffic in Rosemont is impacted by Route 1, King Street, and ultimately 495.

But the city did not model these roads with Braddock.

Chuck knows that the first rule in modeling is to ask the question do the model results make sense?

It seems this step was not followed by the city.

Chuck speaks for many of the peripheral residents off Braddock Road who live daily with what happens on Braddock Road.

Madelina lives with her daughter on East Spring Street.

She had to leave the home she lived with with her husband for 50 years when she became a widow.

She's managing a disease that progresses with age.

The choice to move to Alexandria seemed like a safe location to age in place.

The house has accessible street parking right in front and the ability to get quick emergency services if needed.

She also likes to walk the side streets around her home and is concerned about cut through traffic.

Madelina worries that the changes to Braddock Road will delay emergency vehicles.

She doesn't want to have to fight for parking in front of her home, which she worries about with this plan pushing cars off Braddock Road onto the immediate side streets.

Madelina knows that the unintended consequences of this decision will fall heavily on side suite street dwellers.

The residents of Little Street between Braddock Road and East Oak are a tight bunch of neighbors.

They have to be.

There are 19 houses on the one block.

It is a little street.

The block also has many kids under the age of 10, while there are longtime residents aging in place and others who straddle the middle.

When traffic backs up along Braddock Road, drivers see Little Street as an opportunity to cut through, hoping to avoid the backup at the light at Mount Vernon.

This leads to speeding cars and reckless driving down a small block.

Neighbors have lost side mirrors, kids must scramble to the side of the street while playing, and dog and human walkers are often less frustrated by the behavior of hurried drivers.

Little Street will be ground zero for this misguided decision.

In addition, moving cars from Braddock Road to park on Little Street will leave little room for the residents who already strain the available parking spots along the road.

So these are three short stories of many that demonstrate how this misguided decision by TPB to force bike lanes onto Braddock Road will impact the surrounding residents and community.

If the city is asking residents like Chuck, Madalena, and those on Little Street to accept these impediments, it should provide more than generalized policy arguments.

The city needs to engage with the residents and ask questions about how we use our streets.

Many additional off Braddock Road residents spoke out against this plan.

People with added up hundreds of years of experience in Alexandria, like Preann Johnson, the ACPS lead administrator, John Porter, the former principal of ACHS, David Lord, a prosecutor in the Office of the Commonwealth's attorney, and Rachel Dixon, the commissioner on the Alexandria Commission on Persons with Disability.

The streets off Braddock Road are already an active neighborhood that is currently safe and healthy.

Forcing traffic off Braddock Road will change how we use our streets for playing, biking, walking dogs, and human walking.

We, the residents and community off Braddock Road, urge the city council to approve this appeal and overturn the TPB decision.

Thank you for your presentation.

We won't do clapping.

Well, um, but I'm sure there are many folks for everything in here who had solidarity, but we'll like silent crap or thumbs up or something as well, just so that we can keep moving.

Um, at this time, I'm going to open it up to the council to see if there are clarifying questions.

Thanks, Mary Bagley.

Um, it's not so much a question, but again, as like the it, I hear you on Little Street, and this question was asked a lot of you about the dogwalks.

And so uh it's not so much a question for you, but something I want to share from the compendium because so many of us heard about this is um, and I'm just gonna read the answer that that was shared by staff.

Um school walk-off at FW Middle School included a recommendation for a crosswalk at Little Street, and this would be incorporated into final designs for the Braddock Road project.

Additional crosswalks throughout the corridor will be added during detailed design.

So I just want to acknowledge like they're not on the proposals as as presented.

Um, they are envisioned.

I prefer like just to keep moving, you know.

I don't want to have it like I'm not asking staff a question, but I just wanted you to know that was heard, asked, and that was the response we got.

The one question I'd ask, and it isn't for you, ma'am, but I'm gonna ask it now if I can to staff.

What percentage of design are we at?

Conceptual design.

Okay.

And so just to clarify that for everybody.

And I so I don't have a question for the appellant, but I just thought that that was an important context.

Or you know, just follow up.

Can I ask?

So we we are aware of the we know about the safe routes to schools and that that was little street was added, but there's nowhere else that it was added.

And that that's one of the 13 of the 15 safe routes to schools issues that have not been changed in the two years since that plan was created.

So it's been two years.

And so the the students who have to cross at Little or at Ramsey who choose not to go down to Mount Vernon, just cross in the middle of the street.

And then that is the easiest way and the safest way for them to actually get to school because then they go on the backside.

So yeah, so no, I'm just I I think we're every in the room here is in agreement, and staff is in agreement.

I hear you, it's been two years, but we are actually here now with a proposal that we hope to vote on, and then we are at conception design intends to include them.

Exciting.

And I do think um, because some of the other ones that were not named were Hancock, Wesleray, Ramsey, when we get to our deliberation, I think that we should go through each of those just so that there's clarity on the record as to as we move forward with our plan.

And I recognize this next to the manager, this may have cost implications.

What are the places where we are very clear that they are going?

Yeah, I wrote this about the guy tried to cost those quickly.

Yeah, but the places where we all in agreement that because that came up, I think in every one of our walks and conversations, an agreement where we want to be clear that any future designs have those clearly marked and are an expectation if this moves forward.

Um I saw councilman green first, and then I will come to Councilman Alnubi and then I have a question.

Councilman Gray.

Thank you so much.

And this is um I I think it's to staff, and I can do that right, Madam Mayor, about what was uh I have a question for staff about what was packing said.

Um or how does that work?

So hold yes, no, let's do it here.

Um I ideally I was hoping that we could keep uh so that we're being respectful of the time that pellet were keeping the questions there, but I also understand that we don't come back to staff until a while from now.

So let's yes, but if there are questions from the pellet, this is the main time we have with them.

So we have to keep that there, but we can do the back.

Thank you for your testimony.

Um Miss Carroll, can you talk to me or the consultant maybe about the full scope of the modeling that was done?

Um I guess it was questions about uh the modeling was just done on Braddock, and that the model results don't clearly make sense.

Um, thank you, Councilwoman Green.

I'm gonna um invite Ryan Knight or um uh division chief of transportation engineering to provide an answer on that.

Sure.

Hello.

For the record, uh Ryan Knight, uh transportation engineering division chief of the city.

Um so for the modeling, uh we look at the model uh and before the model even happens, we have a scoping meeting to figure out what's going to be entailed in the model.

Um what we kind of focus on with any project that we do along a corridor is that specific corridor.

Now we only bring in other corridors if we think that it hasn't been captured in that specific corridor.

So the to the question of why wasn't Route One or all these other major streets captured is because we we um we thought that the model represented the the volumes that came from Route One in this specific model, specifically at the uh Braddock and West Street intersection.

So any any traffic that would have come from Route One or any other major roadways were captured either in the existing uh intersections that were included in the model, like West Street or Mount Vernon, uh all those regional corridors we've already captured in the uh in the model itself.

Okay.

Um so all the all of the streets around the the Braddock Road, the scoping of Braddock Road would be included in that in that modeling.

That is correct.

Okay, just so I'm clear.

Thank you.

Um before I go to Council Middle Newbie, I think one of the things that the speaker raised was this process of like on-ground validation.

So can you speak to like the whole we go from scoping to the modeling?

And then is there a process by which we go and do sort of that reality check on the ground?

Yes, and I'll I'll speak a little bit of of it, but I um in invite Dan Skillis to talk about it a little more.

Uh, but yes, any time that we do a model, uh, we go out in the field.

I think it was uh discussed uh before that we do a site visit and just determine what was actually captured in in the um in the data collection, and then before we put it into the model, we say, okay, just do those numbers make sense.

So we actually go on into the field of verify what what the uh the field um investigation is, and then um and then we put in the model if it's uh verified, but Dan invite you to speak on it more.

Yeah, oh thank you.

And and to speak broadly, um, any traffic analysis that we're doing in in the state of Virginia has a standard process.

Uh it's it's got a very detailed way of doing things, it tells you when you're supposed to go X, Y, Z in terms of how far out you look at a corridor.

Um Braddock Road in general, we are like Ryan said we were focused on that corridor specifically, but when we talk about validation, uh, you know, we look at the the quality of the counts we get.

So we have someone out there who actually goes out there and counts it and then they actually verify it at their offices on that.

Uh we take that and also look at it to make sure it doesn't look odd.

Uh one, if it makes sense with what we've seen in the past from either what the city has provided or what Vedot has provided in terms of historical information.

And then we also, you know, we do our field visit too, you know, we we talk about, you know, we hear a lot about queuings and everything, you know, everything.

One of the things that we're also, you know, making sure that we see it happen.

So, like if we're saying that it's you know, a couple hundred feet of queuing, we should at least expect to see something similar to that.

But also we want to make sure that we're not missing something that doesn't um you know that might happen in terms of like maybe there's a fire truck that day that blocked traffic.

I was out there one time and there's a fire truck blocking Braddock Road.

So obviously that wouldn't be valid data.

So uh, you know, maybe there's uh a trash track, you know, it could be all these things, but the other thing too is how do people behave uh when they're turning.

I think the one thing on this road is the left turns.

We saw relatively low number on Braddock at two intersections, and we wanted to make sure that when we went out there, you know, one, why is it so low?

What is it, you know, what's causing that?

And do is there enough gaps?

You know, are we seeing people turn?

Because we hear we saw that a lot in our model, and we want to make sure that happened.

Uh and we field verify that.

So again, we you know, and in addition, the the city has previous data we can look at.

Um and uh we we do rely on also the techs are out there too um who do the signal timing.

So all the data that we get for the signal timing, it comes from the city's traffic engineer.

And again, we go out there and make sure that hey, if I come up with this signal, I should expect to see a left light, right?

Or it says that I can you know wait here for five seconds, it's gonna be around that time.

So we are our people go out there.

Um any type of project we do will go out there um before and then sometimes afterwards if the data doesn't make sense or if we're seeing something wrong to validate it.

Uh so every project will have that.

And in this particular case, um we we did that a little bit more extensively with some of the left turns um in general, just because of uh how and wealth and and Russell, but also um we drove it a few times to make sure that you know, as we're going down, do we are we seeing cues as expected?

Are we seeing that the lengths that we're we're talking about make sense?

So that is happening, uh that has happened uh at multiple occasions on Braddock Road.

Uh Councilman Alnubi.

Thank you.

Um on the model stuff.

Um my colleague asked you earlier if it's our standard process to do pilots to validate what the model told us.

And you said that when we collected results from the field um on projects like Holland, Mill Road, Seminary, etc., it matched what the model was saying.

Um when was Holland installed?

When was uh Mill Road installed?

Do we have enough results to be able to validate from these projects?

Um Councilman Alnuby, um Mill Road was installed last year.

This is over by the Wegmans and the traffic operations that we've seen in the field since then um align with with what we expected when we did the traffic study for that project.

Um Holland Lane is in the process of being constructed right now.

Okay, so we don't have results from Holland Lane and Mills only less than a year old.

Um any of those projects that were listed, the traffic volumes there match the traffic volumes on Braddock or any of the intersections there match the complexity of these intersections we're talking about on Braddock.

A seminary road.

Um and I believe from seminar.

I have a different point about seminary aside from seminary, the other projects that were listed.

Um King Street, I believe had higher traffic volumes um than Braddock Road.

Um Holland Lane has comparable volumes to Traffic Road, recognizing that that one is under construction.

Van Dorn Street, um, I think has comparable volumes to Braddock Road.

I'm talking about the projects that have been installed and the results validated.

Yeah, so all of them have been installed um and validated, although Holland is the one that is still under construction.

Okay, got it.

And what's the latest data that we have from seminary?

What from what year?

That is from I believe it's 2022.

Okay.

And just to note, 2022 government had not returned to work, so as so many private employers.

So I'm looking forward to nowhere data than 2022.

That's all.

Okay.

Um, well, I do have a few questions for you.

Um so my my first question was one of the things I really um appreciated about the I guess sort of the focus of this appeal was on sort of the side street impacts, specifically for West Oaks, Spring Street, and Little Street.

Um, it sounded to me in both the presentation and what I read that there's already some challenges with cut through traffic.

If this um were, and we have a long way to go, if this were to move forward, kind of have you and um Miss Frame or other members who are going to speak to this, thought about what treatments might be necessary or helpful on the side streets to help address um any cut through traffic.

So I live on Little Street, and we had all actually all a bunch of us had already asked for speed bumps along what uh along East Oak Street, but we've been told that that's not allowed anymore because the city has changed their parameters for the width of a street that can have um speed bumps on it, like they do on East Maple and East Walnut and East Linden.

So Oak Street did not qualify for that as we were told by the city.

So it's also a bus route from school.

So I think that may be a challenge.

Um, so you know, I've traffic calming, absolutely.

I know you guys have done some work over on sunset to prevent cut through traffic in the afternoons after three o'clock.

There's a sign.

I'm not sure a sign does that much, but I mean, you know, for uh having cars go on main thoroughfares versus cut through the neighborhoods would absolutely help.

But you know, again, you're gonna add to traffic on the major arteries.

Thank you.

That's helpful.

And I um staff, I'm gonna save it to the end.

But something I would want to hear is just kind of our current standards as it relates to speed bumps, but also what other types of traffic calming um tools might we be able to play.

Because I do think one of the things we're gonna hear from everybody is just how connected we all are moving in and out through these neighborhoods.

And I think our larger goal is not just one street, but all our streets feel a good place to walk and booth.

So I'd want to have some examples for what that could be for later or now.

Um I mean, I guess if you have some right now, I don't know.

I'm happy to.

Yeah.

Um, so our uh our current uh program, we have a neighborhood transportation improvement program in the city where residents on neighborhood streets can apply for a whole suite of improvements that might be necessary, whether that's new crosswalks, whether that's parking changes, adding parking, removing parking, daylighting intersections, adding traffic calming, like speed bumps, things like that.

Um, in our previous criteria, which is now a few years old, um, we had criteria that limited um uh speed cushions on narrow streets, um, like in this example, um, because narrow streets by design are already traffic calmed, and we were trying to create a framework that allowed us to prioritize investment of traffic calming on streets that that truly needed it and weren't already traffic calm by design.

Um, that being said, that was our old process now.

Anyone on a residential street that has um it that is of a certain length and is not a dead end street can reach out to the city and apply for traffic calming.

Um the tools include speed cushions.

We could certainly look at that and collect traffic data and see if speeding is indeed um a persistent problem, um, or if it's something that's maybe more isolated.

Um, so speed cushions are one, chicanes are another where you kind of like bump out different sides of the street and kind of force people to drive more slowly to navigate um down a neighborhood street, curb extensions are another option to narrow um the the intersection so that people can't turn super fast going down that street from the main road.

Correct.

Can I let me ask uh let me get it um come to you and then I do have two clarifying questions?

You can call me Carrie, it's fine.

Here we go.

I mean, I got it.

Um the other thing that happens in our neighborhood is they added the what we call the zebras to the corners, and those all got taken up during Snow Creek.

So they, you know, they they don't last, which is sort of problematic for a budget standpoint and also for a safety standpoint.

I will also say, you know, neighbors lived lives.

We like qu crossing Commonwealth and Oak, we have been asking for a flashing stop sign there, like they have at the Metro at Braddock for over 22 years.

I know the I know the timeline because the woman whose daughter has graduated from college three years ago when she started this you know movement to get a flashing cross at Oak.

Miss Charlotte is a phenomenal crossing guard, but she's time limited.

And so when she's not there, a lot of the middle schoolers who are who are little, you know, walk home and don't have the ability to have the flashing cross there.

So I know the city did a study, which I'm sure you can pull up, but things like that where you have that, you know, you have you have the light at Russell and West Oak, but we don't have that ability on Commonwealth, and there's nothing that stops cars between the railroad tracks at King Street and Commonwealth.

I mean, I'm Braddock, excuse me.

No, I appreciate the additional information.

I I guess the question I would then add back to staff, just so I'm clear.

So under the current guidelines now, it is possible for Little Street to qualify for speed cushions.

They would have to apply for us to review and make sure that it meets the criteria.

The two main criteria now are the length of the street and whether or not it's a dead end street and whether it's a local street.

Sounds like the all it meets all of those criteria.

Then our secondary review process, because we receive many, many of these applications citywide, and we can't do all of them, is to collect data and prioritize projects based on that data.

So we're often we're looking at speed data, we're looking at traffic volumes, things like that.

And so we would collect speed data to assess whether it met the need to for for intervention above other projects.

Uh that leads to my second question, because I mean, obviously, we have a process set up where then when you apply, there's the data and the analysis that needs to happen in order to make sure we're proposing or working with the residents on the appropriate treatment.

Do we have examples or is there a way to amend that process when we are looking at a much larger project, like where we're able to do that review sooner or in conjunction with what else is being planned?

Absolutely.

Um so we have done this on pretty much every other major corridor project over the last several years where we do a before and after project analysis, which includes looking at traffic diversion from the main road and collecting volumes and speeds, not just on the main road, but then on adjacent streets as well, so that we can see after the project is implemented, has this had an impact on the side streets?

And if so, then we will we will make interventions.

And I will just note that up until this point, we have not had any projects where this concern has been shared where that concern has materialized.

So, in theory, though, when we are doing our deliberation later, if we wanted to figure out sort of a explicit recommendation for how we are monitoring and tracking what is happening on the side street, that could be recommended.

And then staff as part of this project could look at on those streets specific measurements over a period of time.

And then in that case, would neighbors still have to go through a process where they apply for the program, or we would recommend treatments based on what we are seeing.

So to your first question, yes, we can we can absolutely monitor um per council's direction.

Um and then to answer your second question, no, they would not have to apply.

It would be wrapped into the larger project, and it's it would be a city driven um project at that point.

And then the last question I had, one of the things um you spoke about was the timing at at the life among I guess yourself, Ms.

Frame and other neighbors, was there any discussion about what tools or opportunities we might have using sort of changes with signal timing and some of the new technology we're trying to deploy throughout the city?

I mean, we we just feel like as someone who comes and goes from the neighborhood, and I run a small business out of my, you know, I work from home, and it's just it's hard to get home when when it's backed up.

It's just it's just lived experiences, you know.

So Ms.

Frame, who lives, you know, who lives off Masonic, she gets it, you know, a little bit later than I do.

So, you know, when there's traffic backups on 495 and on King Street and all those things, and then up the hill at Braddock, you know, it it impacts a small, a small neighborhood.

So it's just it's just lived experiences.

It's not like anything that I can think of besides what's there now, but taking away that especially that left turn lane coming from east to west onto Mount Vernon is really problematic.

So you're heading under the railroad tracks, you have Yates on the left, you know, you make that left turn.

That is the way, and this is another issue that's grander than our neighborhood is ways and Google Maps send everybody that way.

So down, down uh Mount Vernon, which turns into Linden, which then takes people up to Russell, you know, to get to Telegraph.

That's that's just you know, that's how technology sends us that way.

So that's bigger than me than my neighborhood, but that's an experience too.

Are there any other clarifying questions?

Um, this marks.

Or well, just questions, the other questions.

I'm always listening for points of alignment and agreement.

And what I'm hearing from everybody, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, is a general understanding and agreement that traffic enforcement is really important here for speeding and traffic calming in general.

And also we would like to see people following the law and keeping everyone safe in that way.

Um, I know there has been some concern that signs aren't necessarily helpful.

I know that in my younger days, uh, I have been pulled over twice in Rosemont, once at Linden and Mount Vernon for not coming to a complete stop, by the way.

Um, and another time at an odd time of day, I turned on to sunset, um, just not realizing what time it was.

And I was pulled over in both cases years ago.

Um, and I haven't since learned, you know, lesson learned.

Um, I'm wondering what the plan is, you know, until this project is put in place, um, what our current situation is with traffic enforcement.

I know Sheriff Lawhorn has brought this up repeatedly, the speeding down Braddock Road and what the plan is once this project is completed, how we will be enforcing speeds in traffic in the area.

Yes, Councilwoman Marks, I think one important thing to note here is that our transportation coordinates very, very closely with Alexandria police on all manner of transportation related enforcement issues, including speeding and parking and things like that.

And what's really really essential to know is that enforcement alone cannot solve traffic safety and behavior problems.

It is a very helpful tool, but it needs to be combined with good roadway design that is self-enforcing.

So we want to design our street so that it doesn't feel like you can go fast.

And right now on Braddock Road it does because you have especially on on segment three, it's right after you're coming off of a hill from Russell Road.

And the street is wide because of the underutilized parking there are often very few cars parked there, which makes the road look much wider than uh than it than it really should, which invites more speeding.

And we have seen that in the data where people are exceeding 30 miles an hour on that segment and this is a 25 mile an hour road.

So I say that to say that you know the roadway design is an important element of this, but of course we're working with Alexandria police.

They have um offered to do more enforcement in this area based on some of the community complaints that they've gotten also recognizing that they can't be everywhere all the time but should the project be implemented APD would also be out enforcing in the immediate post project period to make sure that people are behaving in the way that that they need to be based on the roadway design.

Okay.

Councilman Chapman Thank you, Madam Mayor going back to the issue of cut through, I think uh with the the other past appeals um that has been something that has been talked about I know in particular on seminary um can can you remind me kind of the the after uh data of kind of cut through I can't remember the name of the the main street that uh cuts off of seminary goes all the way down to Duke.

Fort Williams Park yeah Fort Williams thank you.

Yes.

Um kind of what what what we've seen in terms of after action data in terms of cut through there.

I can't give you an exact number off the top of my head that'd be another thing I'd have to dig up for you but I know that when we did the post project evaluation we collected data on the major side streets including Fort Williams and the overall key finding was that traffic did not divert to the streets to the side streets.

Okay.

Thank you.

I think the the thing that I'm looking at with this particular project that's a little different from what we what the landscape was for King and Even Seminary is the availability of opportunities that people have to cut through.

I think with the the two past ones you've always had opportunities to the either west with King Street or the south south with um seminary.

But here you have opportunities to cut up north and south.

And so does that and maybe I'm overthinking this but does that provide additional opportunities for people to cut off do cut through traffic if they have not just one direction they go can go but other directions depending of course on their your final destination as well.

Thank you, Councilman Chapman.

I think the the short answer to your question is yes in terms of quantity of opportunities um that that is likely more more present here because there's a denser street grid and that's generally how street grids operate anyway including in in old town.

That being said one thing I do want to share is that this is a very similar situation to a project that we did really three years ago now in the Lynnhaven neighborhood which is experiencing very very similar issues where people were trying it's a triangular neighborhood where people are trying to cut between Gleep Road and Route one and people were speeding through the neighborhood residents had a lot of concerns about traffic safety kids playing in the street and we piloted because this was a new idea a slow zone in Lynn Haven where we reduced the speed limit to 20 miles per hour.

We installed speed cushions we installed gateway treatments with like custom neighborhood signage and we did a post-project evaluation and found that traffic volumes and speeds went way down following the project.

So I just I just say that to say that that is absolutely something that is on the table should cut through traffic um be identified as as a problem through this project that could absolutely mitigate any desire for cut through traffic.

I I think the other thing I would just uh I would be remiss if I didn't say is that the temptation to cut through on side streets is when um traffic congestion is unbearable and there is a faster route.

And so I just want to re-emphasize that the traffic analysis that we did found that operations would remain similar to today.

So we don't expect that there would be any additional incentive for people to break off of Braddock Road compared to today.

And that's what where I'm trying to connect the dots with the data that we have and the phasing uh staff has talked about versus the queue length and the people's kind of lived experience and seeing a long line and what they do with that line, regardless of how line that how quickly that line moves and they get up to a certain point and they're still in line, you know, is that desire to cut off and try to go around now uh more evident.

Um thank you for that.

If I could, sorry, yeah, just on the queue lengths.

We did evaluate the Q, the expected cues in the existing condition and in the future condition, and they vary by maybe one to three car lengths, plus or minus at all intersections.

So they're not a significant addition uh of queuing, and in some cases it's the same or even a little bit less.

And that's solely due to the phasing and the loss of that additional length.

Okay.

Um, the other thing that I had was, and I'm I'm glad you mentioned it, kind of the slow zones.

I had a gentleman that um, I think probably reached out to all of us and talking about the the option of doing a slow zone in a portion of Raddock Road.

Was that ever considered?

Um the city does have a an ordinance that allows for slow zones in business and residence districts.

Um that was passed right before we did the Lynn Haven project, which is which is when we piloted it.

Um, and it's typically most appropriate for um neighborhood streets or main streets, say like King Street in Old Town or Mount Vernon Avenue in Del Ray.

Um, that being said, it is something that we could explore since there is a lot of activity in this area that kind of converges around the metro station and the trail and the school and Lena's, um, but it wouldn't be appropriate for Braddock Road as a whole.

Can I can I get Councilman Marks?

I actually have the numbers from um from citations.

So from 2011 to 2019, the average yearly number of citations issues was was 18,095.

And in 2025, the citations issued were 8,968.

So you can see that it's a where?

Um in the city of Alexandria.

Oh, in the whole city.

Yes.

Oh, yes.

So well, seeing no additional questions, I want to thank you for taking time to present the information.

I think what I am summarizing from this conversation is um around the evaluation of impacts the side streets as we consider this proposal, the um need for traffic calming on West Oak Spring Street and Little as we consider this proposal.

Yeah, or um those were ones that came.

I I appreciated the specific pictures and examples that you give on the streets.

Um, and then the um clear delegation of where crosswalks would be put in as we consider this.

Okay, helpful.

Okay, thank you very much for your time.

All right, at this time, um, we are going to move to our next appeal.

This one is for Margaret Janowski, but will be presented by Brittany DiPiano.

And just so that folks have the ability to plan, I'm probably gonna call us to lunch at 1.15.

My goal was that if we take a break, eat, then we're here for all the speakers and they're we're not getting up and cutting in the middle.

So just wanted to give that as people uh need to get up and move around.

But Britney.

Um, actually, before you begin, let us get everything set.

Um, is there a second presentation that needs to be queued up?

I said not that one mayor Gaskins and Vice Mayor and members of city council.

My name is Brittany DiPiano.

I'm a resident at 115 West Braddock Road.

Today I'm here to present the appeal on behalf of Braddock, a group of Braddock residents.

Normally I present to leadership about aerospace products.

So this is a nice change of pace.

Today we'll be focused a little closer to the ground with Braddock Road project.

A little bit about me.

I live with my husband and our two dogs.

We fell in love with Alexandria back in 2022 due to the charm, walkability, and of course, we live on holiday card lane.

Long story short, we would be impacted by the proposed changes.

They would significantly affect how my family and many others manage daily life.

Accessibility can mean many things.

It's not only about moving people efficiently down a street, but also about ensuring residents can reasonably access their homes, unload groceries, help children or elderly family members, accommodate visitors, and navigate day-to-day responsibilities safely and practically.

This presentation will help explain the accessibility impacts to the residents, the incomplete data assumptions and unintended consequences of the decision, constructive alternatives for consideration, and finally ask you to accept our appeal.

There are thousands of residents and community members who've spoken up about the impacts of this of this decision.

Over 1,800 people have signed our change.org presentation petition asking you to accept our appeal.

I'm not going to read this slide, but I know it's been provided.

Accessibility challenges have real impacts on residents.

Although parking is one piece of the issue, there are broader concerns that also deserve attention.

It's about resident access to run errands, conveniently carry groceries and other items from their cars to their home, to have family visit who may have mobility challenges.

For at least four families who don't have dedicated off-street parking or compact driveways, it is about parking.

Like Sandra, who has no driveway and has a power pole and sewer in front of her home, making a curb cut impossible.

I know that there's been added parking in front of this home, but if anyone's tried to park on Braddock, it will become a challenge for that resident to be able to use it.

It's not dedicated to her.

It's also about accessibility for services to the homes on Braddock Road.

Deliveries, I'm sure you see Amazon, UPS, FedEx, trades, emergencies all will be impacted on their abilities to properly work with homeowners.

There are also 10 dash bus stops along this road, which could experience potentially, which could experience delays potentially affecting transit and reliability for riders.

And it's about accessibility for church goers, which you'll hear about from the next two speakers.

But as one church attendee said, I attend one of the churches impacted for choir practice weekly.

Multiple of our members rely on accessible parking and the ramp access that will be removed if this plan moves forward.

Part of the reason we all choose to live in Alexandria, specifically Rosemont, is the history of the area, the style of the homes, the walkability, but it's also a suburb of DC, but it's not the city itself.

Older historic neighborhoods are unique and create accessibility challenges.

Custom homes were built with different design philosophies, features, lot alignment, and builder preferences.

Braddock Road is 0.8 miles with inconsistent blocks.

It's not a typical grid, which results in having to walk further for parking alternatives, alternatives without mid-block crosswalks, which were not added as part of the design.

And I'll just note it's important for residents if we're evaluating a design to have as much as possible, understanding it's still conceptual.

While there was a community feedback survey specifically about this project, there have been other Alexandria resident surveys.

The first looks at the broader travel preferences of Alexandrians and specifically regarding transportation services that should receive the most emphasis over the next few years.

The top four that should be prioritized were pedestrian safety, ease of travel by car, safety traveling by car, and availability of walking paths and trails.

The second looks at how Alexandrians get to work.

While there has been an increase in working from home and teleworking, the predominant transportation method getting to work is driving at 54% and public transit at 14%.

According to the 2024 city survey, a majority of Alexandrians would prefer the city invest in walking safety, availability, and safe and expedient vehicle travel.

The Bradigro Community Feedback Survey was conducted in the fall of 2025 to gather public feedback on several proposed roadway design options.

One of the questions asked respondents to rate individual features of option 1B in segment three.

Option 1B was ultimately selected as part of this design.

And the rating was strongly strongly disliked at one and strongly like at five.

One of the features that was evaluated was the removal of parking on both sides of Braddock Road between Russell and Commonwealth.

In this survey summary, the city states that more than 60% of respondents felt positive or neutral about the parking removal.

However, combining positive and neutral responses makes the results difficult to interpret clearly.

When neutral responses are excluded, approximately 45% of respondents expressed a positive review of the removal.

Conversely, if neutral respondents' responses are grouped with negative responses, roughly 53% express a negative or neutral view.

Looking more broadly at this survey on the right-hand side, the weighted average scores suggest that the most favorable response to this question was no change to existing travel lanes.

The option ultimately selected for this segment received the lowest weight of score among the alternatives presented.

The Alexandria Mobility Plan emphasizes the importance of being proactive, data driven and data-driven decision making.

Community surveys are important part of that process, and the way surveys are developed and results are interpreted and communicated matters.

The residents of Braddock Road understand that we live along a busy thoroughfare.

And it's a trade-off many of us are willing to make for ability to get more easily to work activities and other personal pursuits.

Well, the city used traffic count data to model the traffic impact.

It was only sourced from two days of intersection counts, which is not statistically significant without taking into account potential seasonality and federal return to work requirements.

The chart on the top uses alternative data sources to model impacts from a sensitivity analysis standpoint.

When doing this, the results show a worse level of service and further delays.

Removing turn lanes will create longer waits at traffic lights and additional backups along an already stressed road.

The spillover effect from cars that cannot get through the first light cycle will cause further delays as Braddock is a feeder road from other heavily traveled roads like Brussels Commonwealth, and you've already heard potential dangerous cut through traffic.

Additional studies or analysis were not completed to understand the implications of e-bikes and scooters that would be required to use these bike lanes.

These devices can reach up to 28 miles per hour, the same as a vehicle on that road.

We want you to know that safety is a priority for those who live along Braddock Road.

We experience the patterns of the road every day.

Walking our dogs, driving our kids to school, using the Dash bus system, welcoming visitors and service providers.

It's one of the main reasons we're asking the city to approve our appeal.

The plan does not meet the safety standards for all types of movement.

60% of the proposed bike lanes will not be protected.

The proposal does not have continuous protected bike lanes due to the uniqueness of the wider and narrower portions of Braddock Road.

This creates a scenario where you go from a protected to unprotected bike lanes multiple times.

People don't decide whether to ride based on the best segment of the trip.

They decide based on the worst.

This means that the interested but concerned cyclists that you're trying to target with this implementation may still choose not to ride on Braddock.

In our appeal, we're asking you to overturn aspects of the approval of the current proposal.

But we know that more can be done to create a safe environment for everyone.

We're recommending the city consider creating slow zones as alternative and alternative bike networks on safer side streets.

Although some side streets may lack existing infrastructure, resources may be more effectively invested there.

We suggest building on the Alexandria Commonwealth Complete Streets Investment, extending proven model of gateway treatments, curb extensions, and speed reducing designs.

As I stated previously, speeding is a top safety priority for Alexandrians.

There has been a 50% decrease in police enforcement over the last decade.

The city should prioritize enforcement along the road, which serves as a deterrent to speeding.

We've also listed several additional measures that would increase safety, including delayed green lights, enhancing existing crosswalks, speeder speeder, radar speed signs, similar to what you see up further closer to the Lexus dealership, mid-block crosswalk and mid-block crosswalks.

In segment three specifically, there are no crosswalks except at the major intersections of Russell and Commonwealth.

We have listed additional safety measures here that could be incorporated into the design to further improve safety along the road for all.

For residents on Braddock Road, street parking, travel times, and daily use is not simply a convenience.

It's part of how our homes function every day.

Removing parking may appear minor on a map or in a traffic analysis, but those of us who live here, it can create real challenges that affect quality of life, mobility, and the practicality of remaining in the neighborhood long term.

We understand that transportation improvements require balancing many competing priorities, and we support thoughtful investments in safety and mobility.

We simply ask that the lived experience of existing residents be weighed carefully alongside the broader transportation goals.

Today we ask the city to uphold our appeal and reverse the TPB decision.

Thank you for your service to the city.

Thank you for your time today.

At this point, I will open it up for questions.

Vice Mayor Bagley, those who agree with that of hand.

Okay.

I'll start there.

I think this is a quick one, and I appreciate the appellant finding something we haven't talked about yet.

So thank you for that.

Dash, I just realized in all these presentations, actually, none of it had touched on it.

So can we touch on the impacts and the interaction we've had with Dash about this project?

Yes, Vice Mayor Bagley.

Um, Dash has been involved in the planning and development conversations around this project.

Um, they have not expressed any concerns with anything that's proposed.

Bus stops would continue being serviced as they are today.

None are proposed to be closed or relocated.

Buses will still be able to board and alight passengers, so there aren't any expected changes there.

I would say in certain situations, there's actually an opportunity to make the bus stops more accessible than they are today, because right now there are numerous bus stops along the sidewalk where the sidewalk is not AA accessible because it's too narrow.

Um, and the makes it makes the bus stop uh inaccessible as well because buses require at least eight feet of space to be able to deploy their ramps onto the sidewalk to board and alight passengers using wheelchairs or scooters.

That space does not exist at most of the bus stops along this corridor.

So with this project, we would actually be able to install um uh bus curve extensions, let's call them bus bulbs, similar to those that exist on Mount Vernon Avenue to create that additional depth of the sidewalk and the boarding area so that buses can board and alight passengers with disabilities.

I appreciate that.

I mean, I think it's um it's it's an important just context for the public to have.

And then I don't want to overly belabor um this question and this answer, but um, because it was a central part of the presentation.

I'm actually gonna direct this to Mr.

Sculise, though I let city staff can jump in as well.

I think the appellant used the phrase it's six statistically insignificant, the the data that was taken.

Um, and I just I I want to just address that.

I mean, were these practices?

I I heard like seasonal return to work.

Do the models account for changes in season, uh shifting, you know, work standards is there is there push and pull or flexibility are anticipated in your modeling?

So our, I mean, there was no sensitivity analysis, but our data we're confident in what we provided.

Uh again, that was based off of what we have seen from historical trends and what has been provided, um, which does include the V dot data.

And all that is in line with what is a typical day for Braddock Road.

Okay.

And I I guess I'm I'm I'm stepping out just a bit because like this proposal came at a certain time of year.

Your day, you know, but but models are not designed seasonally, you know, the the mass, I presume is not designed seasonally or is not designed, you know, with a so um can you just take it a step farther and just try to give us comfort if we are to support under, you know, uh believe in the data, how it acknowledges, you know, some days are colder, some days are sunny, or some days people travel, some days people stay home.

Right.

So I mean, generally speaking, um, when it comes to seasonality, like colder months tend to be less walked and biked.

So we see less active transportation in there, and we tend to see more vehicles um because people are shifting.

One of the things that uh again, I do want to reflect on the feed out data.

We talk about it.

Um, and they do provide a resource of what is an average annual daily traffic volume, and that gives us an idea of how the road looks over the whole year, right?

It could fluctuate and go up or down.

Um, there is 2024 data and realize there was 2022 as reflected in the analysis prior, but there's 2024 data.

But you know, there's multiple years that are in there that go all the way back to 2009.

Um, generally speaking, we try to stick in with three years of data.

That is the required standard for Virginia, three years of data and looking at that and some of the numbers that they can provide, say, hey, this is what you should expect to see within peak.

So um, you know, I think it's the the this road operates between 6500 and 7500 vehicles per day in the segments that we're talking, segments two and three.

East of there, it's it's higher.

But in same same practice apply, we use that number and can kind of derive, are we within range?

So our counts that we got were within range of what is a typical day.

So again, the historical bond was there.

And then the city has also has data.

I mean, the city has a very robust data collection program.

We're also able to look at that previous history and say, hey, are we within reason?

So I understand the model wasn't, you know, calibrated up or down in terms of seasonality, but we are confident that the data we have represents typical conditions on Braddock Road.

Um, while we were talking about seasons, it is quite to staff, it is like quite cold in here.

Um I'm sure that's because there's a lot of people and we don't want to make it too hot, but whatever adjustments we can do would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Um councilwoman Marks.

Uh warm.

It's fine.

Um, Miss Dabia.

Yeah, no, first of all, this is a beautiful presentation.

I don't know who's designing everyone's PowerPoints, but uh I'm a big fan.

Uh my job.

Is it?

Yep, that's what I do daily.

Really great.

Uh uh to the vice mayor's point, uh, no one's touched on Dash.

I'm waiting for somebody to bring up the cannon in the middle of the road.

Um, and we haven't touched on that either.

So uh I look forward to that in someone's remarks.

Um I appreciate your point um in using the word specifically that like, you know, there is potential impact that things could potentially impact and sort of acknowledging that we don't know um because we haven't done it yet, um, but that there are anxieties about what could happen.

Uh a lot of the language we've heard today, um, and I'm sure we will hear later is it will.

So I heard it will cause further delays.

Um what I'm hearing from staff is that the delays are limited.

And so I just want to I would love to get some clarity on that.

What are the delays we're talking about specifically on this project if it is approved in completion?

Um, so that we can sort of put that to bed in all further testimony.

What what are the delays specifically that we know will happen here?

Yeah, councilwoman marks, the delays in the proposed condition are pretty much the same as as what they are today.

So each intersection is gonna continue to operate at the same level of service as it is today with maybe plus or minus a few seconds.

Okay, so we are concerned based on lived experience that it may increase, but right now the plan is for the delays to be limited, if any.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Can I say something?

In the TBP presentation, um, each intersection said it could be a 10 to 15 second delay.

And so the quite the concern from I think the citizens and just as a prudent citizen asking questions, I think if you add that up, that could be you know significant over the corridor.

So I think while back to our presentation with the questioning of the assumptions and the data that went into it, making sure that the results are reflective of that is really where we're concerned.

So can we clarify?

Is it 10 to 15 seconds or is it plus or minus a couple of seconds?

So looking at the overall intersection operations for each intersection, and I don't have this slide pulled up anymore, so I'll just kind of dictate it.

So at the intersection of Braddock and Mount Vernon, the existing overall intersection delay during the peak hour existing is 30 seconds or a level of service C.

In the recommended condition, it's 28 seconds or level of service C for the overall intersection.

Now I will note each approach also has its own level of service and amount of delay, and we can certainly get into that.

Um, but that also does not vary significantly from what is existing today in the overall intersection operations are about the same.

So for Commonwealth Avenue, the existing overall intersection delay um in the PM peak hour is 17 seconds or a level of service B.

And in the recommended condition, it's 16 seconds or level of service B.

For Russell Road, it is today 33 seconds or level of service C.

And in the recommended, it's 32 seconds or a level of service C.

So where did the plus 15 seconds come from?

Um, I think it it could have I'm trying to remember now what we said in the traffic apartment board public hearing.

I think it could have maybe come from one of the intersection specific intersection approaches.

Um so for example, if you were looking at like southbound Commonwealth Avenue at Braddock Road, that might be a little bit different than the overall intersection operations, but the overall intersection operations are expected to remain about the same.

Okay, because I can understand when you're sitting in a meeting and you hear that, um, and then later you hear something different where the the wait time is now non-existent, um, that it could cause concern or confusion, just the lack of clarity, which is correct.

Sure.

Um, you know, if it's possible to to figure out where that number came from, just so that we can do you know yeah, it's in the the TPP TPB presentation that was um done back in February.

There was uh a footer on each of the slides that had an approximate delay.

I mean, I I don't need to bring up the presentation, it's their their presentation, so they could pull it up.

Okay, so if so, what we're saying here today is that if if that is in that presentation, um, you know, I've watched the presentation, but I don't recall the footnotes specifically.

Um that to your best understanding and knowledge, having put together this plan, that the actual delay time is 30 seconds to 28, 17 to 16, 33 to 32.

Right.

And that is the accurate expected delay for the overall intersections, yeah.

The overall okay, thank you.

And let's plan to do this.

Um, we're gonna have a number of speakers before we come back to staff.

And I think when we come back to staff, we're already doing a presentation of some of the alternatives.

So we have time in between to clarify that footer as we get there.

Madam Mayor.

Um yes, you are next to my queue.

Thank you.

Uh follow up to staff um on the verification when we use the VDOT data to verify the data we collected on the street.

Um, can you help me understand um explain to me?

And I'm sorry, I should have probably asked this in my briefing.

Um there's another model that one of the residents asks you guys to run, but you guys don't think that model is a correct model.

Don't think that's the aligns with the city's um standards.

That model also used to be the OT data.

Am I correct?

Um, so what's the difference between the data in that model and the data that you use to verify the accounts?

Hello, uh again.

Um, so that model that was uh produced for the um uh for the resident was requested through the FOIA um um process.

And so with that, they asked us to uh look within our existing model and make uh make those uh or modifications to the model itself.

So we end up doing that.

However, in that um in doing that, we did say that this isn't in compliance with uh VDOT standards or or national standards for that uh matter because of the fact that uh VDOT standards want us to use uh more accurate and more um I guess reliable and and more recent data.

The data that we've uh that uh the requester asked us to use, which is the VDOT ADT data.

Um that is uh data that is uh factored and has a lot of assumptions to it, and then also has the assumption of a peak hour factor to it.

So uh there's a lot of a lot of things that need to go into uh bring in the average daily trips, which is the VDOT data into a peak hour data.

So there's a lot of you know, um, calculations and interpretations that need to go into that in order to get to uh a peak hour data.

The peak hour data that was used for our um uh for our um uh analysis was actual data that we collected during that time.

So, with all that being said, uh the um the VDOT standards and the national standards that says what she used to create a model required or prefers us to use actual data that you collect out of the field.

So the baseline data in that model was VDOT data.

Correct in which model?

In the let's call it the FOIA model.

Thank you.

Let's call it the FOIA model.

Yes.

Yes, in the FOIA model, the baseline data was uh derived from VDOT ADT uh data.

And the issue is it the way that data was used to extrapolate other other numbers, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

Now how's that baseline data different from the VDOT data that uh Mr.

Skeleese mentioned earlier that we use to verify our own counts?

Um, Councilman O'Nuby, I'm I'm gonna start.

So one thing I want to clarify here is there's a lot of data going around.

There is historical data that's been collected over time, not in relation to this project, just in periodic maintenance and management of the city's uh street network.

Um so the city collects traffic counts periodically on various streets, and the Virginia Department of Transportation also collects periodic traffic counts on various streets, and these occur over like every few years or something like that.

Um there's also two types of data that we're talking about here.

So aside from it being city or VDOT, there's also ADT, which Ryan's referring to, which is average daily traffic.

These are like total mid-block counts.

Like if you were to just count the number of cars going by agnostic of direction, that is ADT.

And what we're talking about for what we used in our model uh to do the traffic analysis is intersection counts.

And the difference between those is that the ADT feeds into the intersection counts.

But the ADT is a general number, it doesn't tell you where people are going, it just tells you that somebody drove by on this block.

Intersection counts are much more granular, and they tell you how many people were entering the intersection from each direction, and then which movement they made.

So how many people turned left, how many people made a U-turn, how many people went through, and how many people went right?

That granular data is what is required to be used for traffic analysis in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

And so I think what Ryan is saying is that the data that we were requested to input into the model during this FOIA request was not that data.

It was high-level planning level data that was not granular enough for us to be able to really accurately understand how people are moving through the intersection, and thus it's gonna produce wildly different results.

Okay, got it.

Thank you.

Perfect.

Okay, so the data at the intersection, that's data we collected.

Yes.

Okay, great.

Sorry.

What did we what other data did we use?

Because I I heard that we used VDOT data to verify those counts.

What VDOT data was used to verify those counts, and how is it different from the data that went into the FOIA model?

Yes, so we looked at several different counts that were collected by both the city and VDOT throughout the corridor.

We looked at past VDOT ADT data as a high-level metric.

We also looked at past intersection counts collected by the city and when we can of across multiple years, including pre-COVID.

And so when we looked at the data that we collected for this traffic study, it generally aligned with all of the previous data that we had collected and that VDOT had collected.

Okay, I'm sorry, just to make sure it understand.

So the data that we used to verify those counts.

Is the same or different from the data, the BDOT data that was used in the FOIA model?

The data that was used in the FOIA model was among the data sources that was used to validate the intersection counts that we got.

But the difference between that data is A, it was old.

It was a few years old.

And secondly, it wasn't granular enough.

It was just mid-block counts that doesn't actually tell us how people are using an intersection and navigating an intersection.

Um, I just want to be like very clear.

The city doesn't have its like we don't make up our own way of doing traffic analysis.

The Virginia Department of Transportation has a manual on this.

It's the traffic operations and safety analysis manual that is required to be used across the Commonwealth.

And so that's the process that we use and the data that we collected was in line with that process and the stipulations in that manual.

Okay.

All right.

So last question the the data that was used um in the oil model, the VDLD data, the mid-block VLT data.

Is that data good?

Is that data that we as the city consider good data?

I know the problem was the extrapolation, though we was extrapolated to come up with the interception council.

But the data itself, do we consider that valid data?

Yeah, it's it's good for a planning level.

It's just not good for a traffic analysis.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Matt.

Yeah, I think um, as as we're going through this, this reminds me of the conversation we had earlier with the parking um and how that was calculated, and that there are different types of data that we can look at, different types of models that we can execute.

The question becomes how we pull together each of that information and which and how are we being transparent with the public around which pieces are being used to make the decisions up and when.

So I had a question back to um DiPiano.

So one of the things I've I've been trying to take because there are four separate appeals, I'm trying to track in my head, kind of I had to summarize each one.

What's kind of the clocks?

And I think we've covered a couple other pieces, but the one we haven't talked about as much is um two things you said.

One was related to what's the safest type of route.

And so mentioning sort of the focus on protected bike lanes and um the ability to make sure that even our most novice users feel feel safe.

And then the second part was I think it was one of the later slides talked about alternative routes through the neighborhoods.

I'm just curious as um the coalition was talking and sort of um proposing this alternative.

Are the clear where is it?

Um the I guess the circulation in in other streets, would the idea be a proposal that there would be protective bike lanes on all of those other alternative routes, or how are you guys imagining that recommendation?

Sure.

So I'm just gonna say I'm a representative of a group of residents.

So there's one individual that was more focused on creating this.

Um I don't know his full intent on side streets, but I think that the thought from could be that there could be bike lanes installed there, or there could also be the same shared lanes that there are on Braddock today, as those streets have less congestion and are, you know, less traveled than Braddock Road.

Okay, thank you.

I appreciate it.

And I'm asking because I think part of what we have to be thinking about, as we just heard in the previous case, sort of a concern about more on their street.

Now, in that case, I know they were speaking to cars, but specific, but it's also how are we thinking about each street?

What's the volume that's going through, what types of treatments might be needed?

And so I just wanted to see if there was a particular uh recommendation.

Are there other specific questions?

Um, Councilman Gary.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, one of the things that was brought up as well, and we've definitely gotten a lot of comments about is deliveries.

If we have uh bollards up, um, I know it's not through the entire section, but whether we like it or not, double parking happy ends, Grubhub, UPS, Amazon drives me crazy.

Um, what are we envisioning?

Uh oh, and also let me throw another one in.

Uh, people do landscaping.

What are we doing to try and address some of this?

So someone's gonna have landscaper cum or deliveries, how does that kind of look?

Councilman Agiri, thank you for the question.

So I think it it depends on which type of of vehicle we're talking about.

So if we're talking about contractors visiting residents' homes to be let's talk bigger vehicles, like a bigger, a bigger Amazon delivery vehicle or um a large truck for landscaping that the whole wagon behind it.

Absolutely.

So for deliveries, I mean it a lot of it's gonna depend on the operator.

The post office will sometimes park in the nearest available parking spot, grab their bin, walk down and make their deliveries to various homes.

I know some Amazon drivers do that as well.

That doesn't always happen, and it doesn't always happen in the existing condition.

Um, people double park and people double park today on Braddock Road.

And so that's you know, practically speaking, likely going to continue to some extent.

Um people will go around the delivery drivers as they do today if they do happen to pause in the roadway with their hazard lights on for a couple of minutes.

That is really unchanged from the existing condition.

I know folks will have a chance to give comments.

Let's let's make sure we reserve those comments for um the actual hearing so that we can continue to hear the dialogue that's going on.

I'm gonna let Councilman McGiri finish and then I'll come to Councilman Chapman.

Um sorry, I'm getting distracted and I'm trying to remember my my second question.

Um the potential for having bikes going down some of these other side streets, what what's some of the potential dangers of that of that happening as a suppose as a potential safer route since it's a less utilized street from a vehicle standpoint, but what are the concerns um from a biking standpoint and utilizing those other streets?

Yes, um, thank you, Councilman Aguirre.

I think there's there's kind of two points related to alternative bike routes.

One is whether they're safe, and the other is whether they're actually connected and useful to the people who want to use them, whether they're connected and useful to the people who want to use them.

I'll set that aside for now and just focus on the safety question that you asked.

Um, if bikes were to stay, if someone biking or scooting was to stay on Braddock Road, they have the right of way for the entire stretch.

Um, if they were to divert to side streets, they would have to cross major intersections, such as at Commonwealth Avenue and at Mount Vernon Avenue or at Russell Road without the right of way, meaning they would have to navigate gaps in traffic and judge a gap in traffic to be able to make their way across.

And so when we're thinking about people of all ages and abilities and designing a network that that's useful and safe for them, um I've heard many comments from residents that uh that they don't want their kids to navigate those types of uncontrolled intersections on their own.

Uh, so that is a safety concern.

I would also note there's a lot of other challenges associated with the alternate routes.

Um, I know one of them includes navigating private property, navigating stairs and dead end streets and unpaved paths, which is not something we want for um a quality bicycle network in the city and not something we wanna have to encourage people to do.

Um and I would also note that the number of turns um along these routes is much, much higher compared to Braddock.

You don't have to make any turns on Braddock, and you would have to make anywhere from three to 13 turns, depending on which route you took, if you were to take any of these side streets, and that makes it very difficult for people to navigate.

It also means they're more likely to be looking at their phones, trying to figure out where they're trying to go, and that in itself creates a safety issue as well.

That's not to say that people can't take the neighborhood streets if they so choose, but it's important that uh bicycle network includes principal routes like those on King Street and Braddock Road and Eisenhower Avenue, and it also includes neighborhood routes to supplement it's very similar to how we have our street networks where we have arterials and collectors and local roadways.

It's the same same kind of principle.

Um I just wanted to say I can't quite tell where it's coming from, but there are appears to be a number of side conversations, just so you know from the acoustics in this room, all we hear is like all over.

And I think the best way we can make a decision is if we're actually hearing everything that is being said.

So I just want to say that it's not coming from a place of like, I know it's a lot to sit here at this time, and we've just gotten started, but like we actually cannot hear what is being said back to us when there are a lot of the other conversations.

Are there any additional um questions for this opponent?

Uh councilwoman Marks.

I just wanted to clarify.

I answered my own question.

I found the presentation from February 23rd.

Um, and it is online.

It's on Alexander.gov and was able to find the slide that had the uh expected delays.

And I think, I mean, the good news is I think they're just maybe a misreading of it because it is uh very similar to, if not exact, maybe I didn't write down the exact numbers to what we've said here.

So that might be good news uh that there isn't a discrepancy that I can find.

Uh, but I invite you to look.

Um and everybody who heard me ask the question for clarity uh to to look online and find it.

Um, I wish I could give you the link, but I can't.

Uh so thank you.

Yep.

That's that is real.

And additional good news, the way we'll do this um so that everyone can see the same thing is I saw a nod that we have found the slide, and we'll put we'll pull it up later so that everyone has that as we go back through.

Um, I had councilman Chapman and then uh Vice Mayor.

Oh, it's on this one.

Okay, then Vikemar Bagley, and then let me go to Councilman Chapman.

But to to, but I think what's being drawn out here, and again, since we're all doing the deep analysis as traffic experts today, when they use the term delay on that chart, it is not, it is measuring sort of the condition.

It's not saying this proposed thing creates a 17 second delay.

I mean, so this is something I've again had to learn myself, you know, sitting in this chair.

But so when you look at these charts, when it shows, you know, uh yeah, yeah.

I mean, what you know, it would it it literally says uh overall overall intersection delay.

That's that's trying to capture what do you experience when you sit there.

It's not saying there is no delay, you know, the the current condition is zero, and this proposal or that pro like it there is always delay.

I mean, we all sit if we don't make the light, you know, we we wait.

Um, so it's trying to capture sort of the condition.

And so I think what what councilman, you know, she what she pulled up shows 17.1 and 15.6, which I think are some of the numbers getting thrown around 30 seconds, 32 seconds.

Um, that's what we're talking about.

It's not additional delay on top of current conditions.

Is there a better way to say this?

But am I understanding my layman's get explaining this?

Yes, Vice Mayor Bagley, that's exactly right.

And I think the other thing that I would note that could be complicating things as well is that the slide that you guys are looking at, which we also have pulled up here right now didn't just include the recommended alternative, it included all of the other design options that we also presented to the traffic and parking board.

It it is it's a lot to take in.

Okay.

Um, Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I wanted to go back to the slide that had um, I think the ranking of uh maybe intersection on one side and then uh feedback.

Um yeah, thank you.

Um one of the things can staff talk to me about um how let me try to try to ask this question right.

I'm sorry.

Um let me give some, let me first let me give some context.

I think um I saw something similar to this in a whole different process when we talked to our school board a number of years ago about uh their K to eight survey.

I know a lot.

Um their K to eight survey, and they went out and surveyed the community about their thoughts about what should be the future of Jefferson Houston.

Um, and then um had that feedback um based on what the community wanted and went a totally different way.

Um, and that is really eroded trust uh with the community and and the school system.

How do we, you know, if the the weighting uh of a score like this and a decision we selected, how do we not kind of erode that same uh trust if we are asking the community to kind of wait um different choices that we want to see and then saying, well, we're gonna go a different way.

Um how do we know I don't know if that's a uh specific project question.

I hate to put the director on the spot, but um, you know, how do we make sure that we are kind of intentional about making sure the community understands and hopefully supports the decisions that we're making, um, especially when asking for community feedback.

Yeah, uh Councilman Chapman, thank you for the question.

You know, I think first of all, I I don't know that I can validate these weighted average scorings.

I would have to go back into our survey and check that myself to verify it, and we can certainly get into that later.

Um, but I think what we're trying to do is assess the holistic needs of the corridor and people also express their opinions in different ways.

So I think you know, if you look at, you know, if you look at these two charts here, you're seeing different sentiments from each one.

So you're seeing that a majority of people like or strongly like removing parking on both sides of Braddock, and then you've got a chunk of people who are neutral, and then you're looking to the right and you see a weighted average that tells a different story.

We're trying to take all of this into consideration, and we're also trying to take our larger community goals into converse into consideration as well, which residents have also weighed in on.

So I mean it's a balanced community input is a is a huge component of of everything that we do, and we're constantly trying to weigh that again, like some people's feedback versus other people's feedback versus larger community goals versus safety best practices.

So I would say it's one element of something that that we consider and we work to to you know promote trust wherever we can, and it's hard when people disagree and when we're recommending something that people don't like, but you know, I feel we've been communicative throughout the process.

We've um done our best to make information available.

And so I think a lot of it is just like we're proposing something that that where there's people on both sides, you know.

Um I also like our directors again.

Thank you.

Um, so it look, I'll back up and just say that um it's my philosophy that community engagement needs to be extensive and deep.

And um the way that we go about that may look different in the future.

I can't backcast and you know, say how this survey was developed.

Um, but I do believe that when you survey people, you then create an expectation of validating or taking into account their responses.

And when you're asking questions at this level of specificity, you are creating expectations around that level of specificity.

So I know that this project is complex.

We're taking into account a lot of different choices, and I'm going to guess that they were trying to get at sentiment about some difficult choices that would be presented to the project team.

So I, you know, given that it exists, to me, it's one point of data to consider in a larger context.

But moving forward, uh, you can have my commitment that on projects at this level scale complexity that our community engagement, and I'm not saying it wasn't, um, will definitely we we learned some lessons on this project.

They can tell you that.

So we will be uh learning from them moving forward.

Um I hope that's responsive to what you're saying.

Certainly is.

I really appreciate the question.

And just for the transfer industry for everyone, why why I ask a question?

Because I do I do want to get the sense that if we are asking, like the director said, if we're asking things to uh a certain level, and there seems to be a built-in expectation that we are going to follow what folks say, I think that sets us up for a a lot of issues.

And I think again, we've seen that in other local organizations when they have set up some very specific questions, the public has come back and responded and then they've gone a different way.

I would hate for us to kind of get in a mode that that is what we're doing.

Um again, um, I do think and I appreciate staff's work on this.

It's not a critique of staff.

I just want to make sure that we start to make sure that we are separating ourselves from organizations that that kind of do that.

Um so I certainly appreciate the the work and thank you for for bringing this forward.

At some point, I do want to get kind of a little bit dig down into our responses in terms of how many people were positive about self-invices.

So whenever we get that, I'd love to see that.

Okay.

Um, Vice Mayor Bagley.

I think when you build uh a country and a and a state and a city the way that we have for cars for 40, 50, 60 years, you're going to get people who, when asked how important is your car to your life, they're gonna say very.

And so I I see the data you see, and I appreciate the answers, but I also recognize that those answers are informed by structures that we have built over decades that have made people answer in this way.

So they're answering honestly, and I and I I see that, and they have honest preferences, but we we and our design collectively has driven them to those preferences.

We have built an environment that requires cars of many.

So I I'm acknowledging your point.

You know, I I see what you know, you when you when you look at certain elements, certain preferences, but I'm taking that a step up and saying, I see what the preference is telling me, and I know we have a climate crisis, and I know the average car payment in this country is over $700 a month.

I know that somebody who's under the age of 16 or has lost their sight or other challenges and cannot drive, what we have all these other things to bear in mind.

So what I'm saying is if we have built an environment that has people responding to a survey given in good faith, that I want us to continue to build this way, this is a problem, you know, because we can't continue to build this way indefinitely.

So I don't have a question because I actually appreciate both the director and Alex's sort of effort to acknowledge and and the councilman's effort to say why ask people if we're not going to do it.

But I wanted to acknowledge a level up.

I understand why we're getting the answers we're getting, because it's the universe we built and the choices we limited for people.

And so today before us is is one of these moments and one of these questions, which is do we want to get the same answer in 20 years?

Or do we want to get a different answer to this same question?

What are your preferences about how you want to move around?

It's a fair question that's before us today, but that's how I see the question.

Do we want to continue to build in a way that will give this answer?

Which is I understand why it's been given.

And I don't dispute it.

Okay, let me give uh the last questions on this appel appeal to Councilman Agarry.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And uh hopefully it's a quick one.

Um, do we have a slide just since community engagement was brought up?

Do we have a slide that just shows you know what we've done around community engagement for this project and maybe a timeline or something?

Um, Councilman Gary, it wasn't part of the presentation, but we can pull up what we shared at the traffic and parking board if that's desired, and we can certainly talk through all the outreach we've done as well.

And maybe we do that for when we bring up the the rudder thing.

Yeah, thank you.

Any closing comments?

Um, no, thank you very much for your time.

Okay, thank you for your time as well.

Um, with that, I'm gonna go to our third appeal, and this one is for Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, and it will be presented by Reverend Kate Costa.

All right.

My name is Pastor Kate Costa.

I serve at Good Shepherd Lutheran Church.

Our appeal concerns segment three.

Preserving pre parking on Braddock Road between Russell and Commonwealth, including the handicapped space that is next to the ramp next to our building.

I'm also a resident on Crestwood Avenue.

My uh husband and seven year old bike to school every day, two miles to school, every day that weather permits, and frankly, some days that I think weather does not permit, but they do it anyway.

Um, and I don't bike because the segment west of us on Braddock uh is very steep and not safe for bikers.

There's many people who cut uh to pass on the right.

I believe, and so I understand why so many residents care deeply about safer streets and bike access, because I do too.

I believe that Alexandria can achieve safety goals while also preserving access to our faith communities.

Since 1945, we have had this building on this spot.

We have never had a parking lot.

The promo proposed elimination of on street parking in in our block is expansive.

According to the city's presentation, 58 spaces would be removed in our block.

That's out of, I think we're down to about 93 in total for the whole project.

These 58 spaces matter during some of the holiest and hardest moments of people's lives.

Baptisms and memorial services, weddings, grief, celebrations.

Faith communities help build what our congregation calls a bigger table, places where people can find music and friendship and support and care.

Individuals and families rely on these connections, and parking makes access to that support possible.

As you make this difficult decision, I want to raise four important values community accessibility, transparency, and creative solutions.

Good Shepherd is primarily a place of worship, but it's also a community resource.

Our space is used every single week, pretty much every single day by music programs, support groups, blood drives, community gatherings.

For seniors, caregivers, and families, accessible nearby parking is what makes participation in these spaces possible.

In a time when loneliness and isolation are rising, Alexandria needs more spaces that bring people together across generations, not fewer.

As we develop infrastructure for bikes and micro-mobility vehicles, which I think is very important.

Alexandria should still first prioritize accessibility.

City of Alexandria recognizes this value and the mobility plan.

Many weekday mornings on Cork.

Creativity for older adults uses our sanctuary.

About 80 seniors from age 55 to age 90 and beyond come through our doors.

Many of these require accommodations.

There's a man who uses a white cane, a woman who comes every week with it with an aid.

And they take the shortest route because that's the route that's possible for them.

These are the exactly the Alexandria, the residents that Alexandria wants to support in aging safely and staying connected to community life.

Accessible parking, slowing speeds, more crosswalks, as we've already talked about matters to help support this vision.

As a religious organization, we aren't required to meet the requirements of the AD to A, but we do so voluntarily because it's the right thing to do.

We made a 1.2 million dollar investment in our building.

Uh, so that that could happen.

Uh removing the space that is right next to our building would make it impossible for many folks to come to church because it moves it from 25 feet that they have to walk to 175 feet that they have to walk.

And it would make it very difficult for many folks like Babs.

Babs doesn't have a handicapped placard, but she avoids stairs after multiple surgeries.

She wrote to you, I have never asked for anything from my city before, but now I am asking you not to make it harder for me to come to my church.

The proposed spot on Hancock could raise, we've already talked about this.

Um there's three sewer drains and a pole there.

I don't know if it's possible.

Um, but it needs more study.

More than 85% of the people who attend Good Shepherd Drive, and for many good reasons.

Many used to live in the city and they continue to commute in because they love their church and they care about this city.

Many drive because they have physical difficulties.

Many drive because they bring food donations, instruments, supplies by car.

Parking in this area already presents a challenge.

We have worked hard to try to get to know our neighbors to help them when they are in need to smooth over very normal concerns of our city, but this project would remove some of that progress.

This slide claims that there is ample weekend parking, but this does not account for the unique ways that religious organizations use this corridor.

Faith communities experience parking very differently than retail or office space.

For religious services, parking needs come in large waves.

And we believe that the neighboring streets cannot accommodate these services.

This isn't what we would call a typical day.

Good Shepherd has been doing its own parking counts.

Beyond Braddock, there are 66 spaces on nearby streets.

This slide shows how many cars were parked on six Sundays this spring.

You can see on four of the six states, there were not enough spaces on the surrounding streets to accommodate the cars that would need to move off of Braddock Road.

Unlike higher density areas such as Old Town, this corridor does not have parking garages.

Again, we don't have a parking lot or other similar infrastructure to absorb these cars.

The impact would be similar to removing dozens of parking of public parking spaces next to a vibrant senior center or other community-based nonprofit.

Alexandra has an opportunity, and I have been thrilled to see the progress that you've already made today.

I know it's been a long day, but you've made a lot of progress.

Uh, to model creative community-centered planning that improves safety while still preserving this accessibility.

Solutions like moving bikes to quiet or nearby streets, creating carve outs for handicap parking.

If we can create a five-space carve out for a driveway, can we create a carve out for a church for handicapped spaces?

Adding a drop-off or a loading zone on Braddock, creating where the ramp is now, creating Sundays and weekend parking zones with permits available for large services for events like weddings or memorial services, or creating wild multiple multimodal two-way parking or two-way path so that we could preserve parking on one side.

Alexandria's faith communities have spent generations helping to build bigger tables, places where neighbors can gather, can grieve, can celebrate, can sing, can serve.

We believe that there's a way to improve safety for bikes and for walkers while still preserving these places of connection and care.

We respectfully ask that you reverse the decision of the traffic and parking board with respect to West Braddock Road and remand the project for further study.

Thank you for the immense amounts of time, attention, care you have shown through this process.

I am so grateful for the work that you do and for your consideration.

Thank you, Pastor Kate.

At this time, I will open it up for questions.

Sorry, not to belabor the point.

If we're uh and thank you, Pastor Kate.

The question is not for you.

It's actually gonna be for stuff.

Thank you.

Um if we're able to um put in sidewalks along the rest of the um surrounding the church.

Um would it be able to be done in a similar timeline that the project is being done?

And um answer that one first, and let's see if I remember the second part of it.

Uh, yes.

Okay.

And um would it be possible or do we do something where, say, we can dedicate um those two sidewalks specifically for like handicap or elderly accessible?

Um do we is there any other option besides just straight handicap and can we do it specifically for like a day for like say when service is happening that these these spaces are reserved for?

We do have other examples in the city where we have um different parking restrictions near houses of worship.

Um for example, there might be like a time-limited parking for when church hours are in service or something like that to discourage people from parking there for long long periods that would allow the spaces to be more open for for church goers to use those spaces.

Okay, yeah, and I just bring this up because I think it's a larger conversation around sidewalks and creating some more accessibility for the church as we decide what we're gonna do.

Uh councilwoman Green.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you so much, Pastor Kate.

Um on the lines of the um sidewalks again.

Could you go back to the slide with the sewer and the poll?

I guess it was.

And could I get someone from the city to talk to if this would be an issue with the sidewalks?

Councilwoman Green, um, no, we we don't expect that it would be an issue.

Side there are sewers in them in sidewalks all over the city.

Okay.

So that's not an issue.

And there is sufficient space around the utility pool to provide an accessible sidewalk.

Thank you.

Um, I'm struck by something that Pastor Kate said earlier, which was as we were sort of listening to community feedback and making changes.

There is a carve out in segment two for um some of the homes that don't have driveways.

Um explain to me sort of why a carve out was considered there, but not here.

And if I don't know if I shouldn't say, I guess if it came up and if so, how was that um decision evaluated?

Yes, um, Mayor Gaskin.

So there's two um areas on segment two where parking is preserved.

The carve out area that I was talking about is something that already exists.

It's like a it's like a cut into the pavement.

Um, so it's like a reverse curve extension where where people can park that's like separate from the roadway.

So that that was already constructed as not something we're proposing to construct.

We're just proposing to leave it as is so that parking would remain.

The other area where we were preserving parking is where the street gets a little bit wider.

And again, that was done to accommodate the resident that does not have a driveway um on Braddock Road.

And so we were, you know, trying trying to balance all the different needs, make sure that we're providing the connectivity and the safety benefits that that we get from the proposed improvements while still making sure that we're providing meaningful access to residents and to other visitors to the area.

And you know, we we can talk more about the parking study, but again, we've we've also talked about it a lot already, is that there is a lot of parking within the neighborhood.

It's just a it is a question of do you have to park and walk a block?

How how close would you be?

And we do have a responsibility to provide meaningful access um via parking.

But our I do want to note that like our our Alexandria Mobility Plan also specifically includes a policy um that preserves parking, quote, recognizing that some people may need to walk a short distance to their destination.

And so we're trying to keep all of these different adopted policies and plans in mind as we are crafting our recommendation.

I understand that.

But I guess um, as I'm tracking, so we're able to do this further up in segment two because the road widens here because segment three is wider in theory as we have our deliberations.

If we wanted to do a similar type of carve out, there is the space to do so in theory, yes.

And um, this may be, I think another question for staff.

That area in front, I know um I think earlier discussions somebody had mentioned two potential spots.

I think Pastor Kate just said five.

What is the total number of what's the capacity of parking that is on that?

Um, I don't know if we have a picture on this slide.

Um in this slide, it might just be in maybe we have to do this in a staff presentation.

But do we have a sense of from the current ramp access to, I guess, hand caught?

What is that number of spots?

From the current ramp access or the the total number of spots that are on that block in front of the church?

You say 12.

12.

Let's get both numbers.

So the whole thing and then that.

The block is 225 feet long.

So if you were to measure from the existing ADA ramp to the proposed ADA space on Hancock, it's about 140 feet.

And then if you were to go from the existing ADA ramp um to the proposed ADA space on LaRay, it's about 160 feet.

And then just as a uh for context, a typical city block is is about 250 feet.

Okay.

Um, we don't have to do it off top of our head, but I would like to have that translate into parking spaces.

So I can get a sense of the number we'll look at.

I think what I'm trying to be mindful of is just um a couple of things that came up both in the presentation, but also in my walk.

While there are folks who is part of meaningful access will have to walk a larger distance.

This is an area where we are dealing with a number of seniors and as I balance our age-friendly plan, our mobility plan, all of these pieces, how are we also reconciling those together?

And if there's an opportunity where we're doing sidewalks, we're doing all these other improvements.

Let's think about that connectivity together so that as many people um can have that accessibility as possible.

Um Vice Mayor Bagley and then Councilwoman Marks.

Um, thank you.

And one of the things I I do want to note about this, your presentation and meeting with you and your congregation is like the holistic approach I think you guys have to people getting there.

So I I have a question.

So just it's it's meant to be a little bit of a softball, but um, do any of your um staff or congregants get to the church other than driving or walking?

Is there another method that they might like to use?

Well, yes, how nice of you to ask.

Two out of our nine staff don't have cars and they use bus exclusively.

Um, and we do not have bus service on Sundays on Braddock Road.

So I this is a yes and opportunity.

Um yeah.

So I just wanted to highlight that I I do appreciate um what this appeal also pointed out was um if we're going to eliminate or you know, certain parking or ask people, you know, to consider other means, how are we accommodating that in other ways?

So uh Josh Baker and Dash isn't here, so I'm not gonna, I'm really not gonna put you guys on the spot, but I I wanted to say out loud for the community.

Um, you know, the 102, 104, I think comes down, Braddock.

Some some three and one.

103 and 104.

All right, and 104.

So the 103 and 104, um, their frequency is not at the level that I think it, you know, meets sort of our our long-term vision and strategy.

And so um Yeah, and they serve not just us, but the Presbyterian church up the street, the um, and I I don't know if they run on Saturdays as well, which community praise church unfortunately isn't able to be here to speak today because today is their Sabbath.

Right.

Um, and I know you've all seen the video.

Um and uh, and they are five times our size, perhaps.

And so the struggles that we have, they have much more.

Um, as well as the Catholic church that also doesn't have bus service, though.

Perhaps you could come from King.

Yeah.

So I mean, I I mentioned this.

Um, if if any of our, you know, anybody here on the panel, you know, wants to volunteer any information about that.

What I know is this hasn't necessarily been, you know, a corridor that we have, you know, currently we prioritize, you know, that those two routes um for to increase frequency and to consider you know, changes to Saturday service.

We will need to be doing more of that.

And and especially if a project like this is approved, um, a corollary to it is, and so what are we doing about bus service?

You know, what are we doing about capital bike share stations in the area?

I did check in with Wamada, and um that capital bike share station and and that and bike usage at Braddock Road is in the top third of the network.

So this is an area where people do want bike connectivity, or they'll multimodal a trip, a bus ride, you know, to the station.

So um, no question here, but I think it's just valuable context, and it's something that your congregants helped highlight for me is is that the trade-off really isn't there yet for everybody.

Yeah, the bus, the bus is right at our corner.

I mean, it's very close to our so to be able to say parking is a struggle, plan extra time.

Um, but bus service is available right at our door versus metro services available half a mile away.

Um, and most of the bikes that I see um are getting ready to go up the hill.

And so most of them are electric bikes.

We have uh bike station on the or bike a parking bike rack on the other side, because I think we uh assumed that people were going coming from the quieter streets.

Um, and so now we are needing to look at making an investment that we've already made, right?

We made that investment toward accessibility and unfortunately didn't plan it in the in the right way.

And so now we're looking to how can we be a part of the solution?

How can we move forward while still recognizing that it's gonna take time?

Um one of your city staff told me you just need to become like Alfred Street Baptist, you just need to be a city church.

I understand that's true eventually, but it's gonna take time for us to change.

Um, and as you've seen, there's a lot of difference between segment one and segment three and where we are.

Um, so it's it's gonna take cooperation for that adaptation to happen.

And and people join churches and they stay members for decades for a lifetime, right?

And so we can't just uh have a different group of people coming in.

Oh sorry, no.

Okay, councilman marks.

Pastor Kate, hi.

Hi, nice to meet you.

So sorry that in the past three days we haven't been able to connect.

Welcome to the council.

But I do want to assure you, I've read all of the emails from your congregants and your many fans and supporters, and actually am connected directly with one of your bus riding uh co-workers.

Ah, okay, fantastic.

So thank you for being here.

This question though is along the lines of what the mayor I think was getting at, um, some of her probing, which is for staff.

Um, and I don't know if uh director Riley wants to answer this or if Miss Carroll or Miss Orr.

Um what does if if we were able to retain two spots or or something like that, if we were able to look at the you know, linear feet and and think through that.

What does that do to the connectivity and um connectedness of the overall project?

How does it affect the use the usability?

Yeah.

Um, councilwoman Marks, I can answer that.

So um this is this sex, this section, segment three is a little bit wider.

We do have a little bit more space to play with, which is why we're able to get protected bike lanes on this segment as opposed to segment two.

Um if we were to retain um parking on the north side of Braddock adjacent to the church, um, it would fit, it would require the bike lane to become unprotected along the on-street parking, which is I know something that um some folks here have expressed concern about.

So it it would fit.

Um, however, it would be narrower than what is recommended for an all ages and abilities bike facility, which is what we're trying to design for.

But that being said, it it would fit.

So it's just a matter of trade-offs.

It's just a trade-offs question.

I'm not looking for specifics here because I understand you know, we're in the concept phase, and I don't want to put you on the spot and and try to design a road right here in this moment.

But is it worth considering can you foresee a possibility where it is can you foresee a world in which it is possible to retain both protected bike lanes and preserve some kind of ADA accessible parking near the existing ADA accessible spot?

It is not possible to keep protected bike lanes alongside the parking.

So if we were to retain parking on one side, they would not be protected bike lanes.

Okay, it would be a continuous bike lane, it wouldn't be a shareow, but it would not be a protected bike lane.

So is it possible to mix and I'm asking this knowing the answer a bit, but is it possible to mix protected bike lanes and also share rows in that short space?

We wouldn't have to install Sherrows.

They just wouldn't have bollards, they just wouldn't have the flexible bollards making it a protected bike lane.

So it would still be a bike lane.

It would still have the bike symbol in the lane and everybody they would have their own space, but it wouldn't be a physically separated bike lane that would exist on the rest of the corridor.

I think what I'm getting at is it possible to have a gap in the bollards.

Yeah, yes.

That is a share of it wouldn't be a shareow.

It would just be a gap.

It would basically be a buffered bike lane.

Okay, right.

So it would be a bike lane, a protected bike lane without the physical protection.

So it would have the buffer space, the striped buffer next to it, but there just wouldn't be any collards in it.

Okay, yeah.

So that's what that would look like if we were to retain any number of parking spaces in that space.

You can have either the the bike lane with the buffer or protection and no parking, or if you kept parking on one side, it would just be a painted bike lane.

Okay, and that is for any number of parking spaces.

Yes, whether it's one space or the entire section to that parking.

Okay.

So if there's a section uh on segment three, for example, where you didn't want to add back parking, that would be a protected bike lane.

And then as you get to the church, if the parking were to remain on the north side, it would transition from a protected bike lane to an unprotected bike lane, and then it would transition back to a protected bike lane once you get past the parking.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Just to be clear, there's already large segments on segment two that are unprotected bike lanes.

Just with the hopefully green paint.

No, I hope it's green.

I'm but I think what it does sound is that there is an opportunity for creative solutions.

I'm out of mid lane again.

Um additional questions for Pastor Kate.

Councilman Chapman.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um much like many of the other houses of worship, I'm I'm assuming as uh attendees and the the demographics of your attendees are getting skewing older.

Is that is that a correct statement?

Um every year they get older.

Yep.

But the amount that's what I'm getting at the amount of amount of older folks versus younger congregants.

We we have a we have very much have a mix.

Um about uh 50 of our 350 or through 50 of our 300 members are under the age of 18.

So we have a lot of children.

Most of our new members are young adults um who come, uh or they are folks who have retired here, which is very odd to me.

But um, there are people who do retire to Alexandria despite the cost of living.

And so we we do have our our average age is 39, which is the same as uh Rosemont and Delray surrounding us.

Okay.

No, um I know there's I don't mean to belittle you know those who those who are older have been members for decades.

And so we we have very much a mix.

Okay.

That's that's perfect.

I I definitely know some congregations that have uh a much larger older congregation than younger um and I'm just trying to understand kind of how how that works because I I wanted to go back to kind of the a couple of things um the kind of capacity for handicapped spaces you know if there were additional handicapped spaces in front of uh the the building would they be used like if you had two or three spaces that were specifically handicapped would they be would they be full up or is there some yes I mean I would say we probably have three or four who attend every Sunday who have handicapped uh placards.

I mean there are more folks who for reasons of pride or for reasons of being on the edge of accessibility um don't have placards when they probably could um but we have uh folks Mike Miss Denise who um are here every every single week um Pastor Anna's there every single week we have uh three or four who are there every single week um and and then you know part of our concern is also our community groups who use our space and as I said one of those major ones is Encore Creativity for older adults and their creativity for older adults so they're all 55 and older.

Perfect thank you for that um the next question I have is I think kind of for staff um with when it comes to our but just to finish that thought um I you know we we have those that that entire stretch becomes kind of de facto uh mobility use parking because people don't want to park on Braddock they're gonna lose their mirrors right it's it's not it's not a a great place to park and have to get out of the driver's side door anyway and then when you have a bike lane there you certainly don't want to open your door into a bike or that's the most dangerous thing for bikers.

Well maybe not the most dangerous bikers deal with a lot.

But um but that that stretch becomes kind of de facto uh accessibility parking because people will park immediately in front or behind even if they don't have a placard if they need to bring in donations if they need if they have a stroller you know any reason why they would need a ramp.

That's why the blood drive uh vehicles park all of those kinds of things happen in that space.

Thank you that thank you.

Um next question is kind of about our program for funeral parking signs.

I know if I remember correctly from dealing with this years ago um churches and other organizations uh houses of worship can apply for a certain amount or a certain amount of space I can't remember what it is for funerals to be able to set that parking aside and can somebody talk to me about kind of what that program is I'm not specifically clear if this is a funeral program but people can apply for no parking signs for things like their moving truck or if they are getting tree work done.

And so we have the same process where folks can apply to have those no parking signs put up to reserve or I'm sorry reserve parking um for a special event.

And what's the what is the maximum amount of of space they can apply for I don't believe there's a a maximum but they do have to pay for it.

They have to pay for the spaces okay um and so I guess the the reason for the question is because I'm trying to understand you know if if churches regularly have or may you know every every once in a while speculating have funerals how much space can they kind of cordon off for that funeral and if we no longer have parking in front of Braddock Road, what is the maximum amount of space that they would take up for a funeral right you know um we've dealt with this in the past in the number of churches in old town um in particular green funeral home uh would always call us and call Jan about how many spaces they were they were looking to take up and and separate out from um the community and and I want to kind of understand if we are um taking away that that space on on Braddock how do then does that affect neighborhood particularly neighborhood streets around the church because the church church doesn't have parking right this is not necessarily an issue at some of the other uh churches that already have a built-in parking lot but particularly for this one what does that look like and um obviously hopefully this is not happening often but it happens um so I I think I want to kind of understand that play as well.

Right.

And and I'll let Lindsay Wayne, if she has any any thoughts.

Um, but I think we would work with the church, right?

Funerals are all different sizes, and so every every event is different, and City Staff is always happy to work with different institutions to help facilitate.

Um, I you know, I think we we do see that particularly during the day there's ample parking in the in the adjacent area, and so we could certainly work with the church on on what that looks like when there is a funeral if they were losing those 10 spaces directly in front of the church on Braddock Road.

Can we just get back to you with more specificity?

None of us has the actual details.

So when we follow up later, we'll have more information about how that would function.

Okay.

What that would look like.

And I just a side comment.

I I don't think it's necessarily a good um with with all due respect to my church.

Um, it's not a good comparison.

You know, the the church has spent millions of millions of dollars in acquiring other properties so that they can have parking.

We've been told multiple times to go to other cities, other places, other neighborhoods because of the interactions with neighbors.

Um, I don't get that sense from the neighborhood and the church right now, and I would never um advise that that is the relationship that you want to have because of the success of people worshiping there.

I think one of the final questions I have uh kind of along those lines, and obviously um I think every church's hope is to grow, but I I kind of want to understand, and I know this is getting into the weeds and future forecasting in a way that might not be um particularly happening, but if if this church were to come toward to the to the city wanting to grow and grow the facility because of you know, many more parishioners coming.

What does that look like for parking?

I know with um and you've seen this on the traffic and parking board with buildings with um some businesses in Del Ray, because they've been neighborhood parking.

We've given some uh some uh exceptions for having to build parking, but something that doesn't already have parking.

We have only a couple of um, at least in the recent memory, um, examples of, but what happens if they want to uh build?

They want they get you know uh 200 more parishioners and they they want to build on their property.

Uh I don't know if somebody from planning and zoning is here, but it depends on their zoning, it depends on the density that they want to build and land use.

So I mean, uh that's the extent of my knowledge to answer your question, but yeah, I think they would have to meet the current zoning code, whatever that is, if they were going to redevelop and expand.

And if if they do that, I'm assuming there's a correlation to amount of parking that they would need to be able to provide or find a uh support or a partner for.

Uh I don't know the codes here in Alexandria, but in my experience, it's all FAR related and like yeah, uh Mr.

Manager.

Yeah, council member Chapman, you're you're right.

Um, we have so many different situations that uh you know, an expansion of a church is is somewhat normal, um, but how they may manage their parking or their transportation, so dependent on where they're located, you know, we've seen churches that will partner with nearby schools, for instance.

We'll see uh churches that are embedded in urban areas where they really rely on on street parking or adjacent garages that are not used during that period of time.

Um so it's really a combination of different things.

If that were to happen, that process that you eventually get to deliberate on will go in front of the city council for review and uh the analysis of the impact of that expansion, particularly as it relates to parking in the neighborhood and things like that.

Okay, um, well, thank you, Pastor Kate.

We appreciate your your comments.

Um any final thoughts.

Okay.

Um so at this time I'm gonna move to our fourth appeal.

Thank you.

Thank you.

For the record, so the fourth appeal was uh is the community appraised choice.

Uh sorry, it's been I need some food.

It's the community appraised church.

They are our fourth appellant.

One of the things I want to just make clear to the room is we are committed to make sure that everyone is heard.

And so we actually previously did not have a we did not have a policy where we allow video testimony.

In this case, we have allowed a video submission, and that video has been sent to every member of council.

That video is also posted so that the public will have an opportunity to view that as well.

That said, I did want to make it very clear um how serious we take this.

That said, I did want to make it very clear how serious we take this, and so I would like each council member to nod and affirm that they have received the video and have viewed that video.

And additionally, I think we have received a number of letters and testimony in which all people have identified themselves as either a representative or a member or somebody who has used uh the church.

And so I just wanted to be clear that while a representative from the church is not able to be here physically because it is their Sabbath, we did try and figure out ways that we could at least get video in an opportunity to hear additional concerns on the record.

And I know those concerns will be taken seriously and incorporated into our deliberation.

At this time, what I'm going to ask is for a member of the council to make a motion for us to recess for 30 minutes, the purpose being so that we can get some food and then go to traffic and parking and then go right in and be here fully present and energized to hear from the public.

Um, just so that everyone who's in the room knows, I know there are limited food options in the area, um, but there is a uh small plaza down the street with Tacaria Picoso and a few other places.

But um, if you put something on your seat, your spot will still be, you know, your spot's still here, and we'll make sure to honor that as well.

Um, but we will take 30 minutes and then go right in to all of that.

So move to recess for 30 minutes.

There's been a motion to reset and affected by Councilman Gary.

All those in favor say I.

I any opposed, I have it.

We'll be back at two oh five.

Okay, I didn't see her for a second.

It's uh two eleven, and we do have quorum, so I'm going to go ahead and bring us back together so that we can stay on time.

At this point, we will start with a presentation from the chair of the parking the traffic and parking board, and then we'll have clarifying questions, and then we'll go into the hearing.

A note on the traffic and parking board.

The enacting city legislation for the traffic and parking board says the traffic and parking board shall consider matters concerning substantial changes to traffic and on street parking regulations and taxicabs.

When reviewing these matters, the board shall prioritize safety of all users with when making recommendations.

City staff provided a detailed presentation of the project and addressed many of the comments that the community had raised, including emergency response and providing handicapp parking.

Prior to the meeting, the board received over 271 written comments.

And during the meeting, we heard from 65 residents testifying about the proposed changes.

After the public testimony, members of the board rendered their decision.

In consultation with members of the board, these are the factors we considered in our votes.

Safety for all users, providing median refuges and protected crossings for pedestrians, separating motor vehicles from bicycles, scooters, and other mobility devices, extending the separation of vehicles to connect with existing bike lanes west of Russell Road, supporting the multiple policies enacted over many years by city council, improving the safety of children attending the several schools that connect to Braddock Road, the parking study and utilization done for the project, community engagement included 10 meetings with various community groups were held.

I would note that in the conversation we had at our meeting, one uh board member indicated uh they might have changed their vote to suggest something like delaying the project, but uh nobody else on the board felt that way.

And so it at best um the majority of us were still in support of what I'm in uh we had talked about there.

Now I'd like to go back to a couple of the items that uh that were discussed above.

One of them is safety.

We heard that data on the on safety was uh was not conclusive.

However, the data provided still provides some context on the safety along Braddock Road.

City staff provided data on crashes along the corridor.

Speakers testified on their experiences using the road.

A survey had been conducted prior to the start of the project in uh 2025.

289 people responded.

Over 66 percent of them said speeding was an issue.

And that I would note, and I know you guys had some questions earlier about some of the uh uh survey stuff, but uh the 66 percent included people who drove.

So it speeding is clearly uh an issue on this uh roadway.

And if people haven't been killed yet, we're just lucky.

Um, Alexandria families for safe streets reported on 17 near misses.

I happen to think those really should be called near hits.

I think that's more uh really what uh implies happens as opposed to not hitting somebody.

It's or not missing them rather.

While some of the data is anecdotal, it still paints a picture of a road that is not perceived to be safe by some users.

And then to policies.

The city has been building a set of policies since 2020 that have clearly stated that the road should be safe for all users.

And I understand earlier there was some you know comment that sometimes policies don't really have to be fully uh enforced, but I think when you start to see the laundry list of policies that have been created, and you'd seen that earlier in the presentation uh that Ms.

Alexander had uh presented.

Uh so safe reached the school in 2003, complete streets policy in 2014, vision zero in 2017, eco city action plan in 2019, the Alexandria Mobility Plan in 2021.

It includes the 2016 pedestrian and bicycle master plan.

And of note, within the Alexandria Mobility Plan is the curb space prioritization framework.

The framework prioritizes city plan priorities, including safety improvements over other uses of our roads.

Um you guys had had an earlier question about kind of where did this all start?

So if you really want to go back in time, go back to 1974.

The city uh created a study group to look at bike lanes and storage facilities, and they published a report in 1974.

The city council adopted the report.

Um, it was partially funded from EPA.

Um, and one of the really interesting things about that report, it led to doing some bike infrastructure, which was to create a shared use path on part of Braddock Road over by the uh uh Piscal High School.

But when you want to know about Braddock Road, in that report, they called for a bike lane running the length of Braddock Road from West Street to um Boringarden.

The principal reason for that was to connect three other loops that were coming from Old Town, the uh King Street Metro and the Van Dorn Metro.

So in 1974 is when people began to think about that, began to think about this.

And I would also note that every one of these plans approved by city council, various warrants, every one of them had public hearings, and many of them actually had participation by the public in creating them with this expectation spelled out of making the road safe for all users.

There are three methods to make a road safe for all people: education, enforcement, and engineering.

We've talked a little bit about enforcement this morning.

Well, education does reach some users, it does not reach everyone.

An effort to reach some of the most vulnerable uh users is in the public schools.

Volunteers conduct safety bike rodeos, assist with bikes in the school program, and come to talk to students about how to safely walk in the city.

One could argue traffic signs such as 25 mile per hour speed limit, no turn on red, and no passing are part of our daily education.

But again, you will hear constantly that that's not followed.

So we still need to do something.

Right.

Next is traffic enforcement using police officers typically only effective for a small window of time while the pre-police are present.

You guys talked about Waze directing people off streets.

Well, Waze also reports the presence of police.

And so when I've talked to the police officers, they say they usually have about a 15 to 30 minute window to effectively be able to enforce speed speeding on the streets because they're found out.

And so they're happy to get their one ticket, maybe two tickets they write, but then they leave.

And there simply are not enough police officers to leave uh to have a 24-hour presence on virtually every road in the city.

Speed cameras and red light cameras are limited into deployment by state law.

And unfortunately, these devices are viewed by some as only a way to get more money, not as a way to try to enforce speeding.

Education and enforcement are simply not enough to keep people safe.

That leaves engineering is the most viable solution.

Narrowing, narrowing, narrowing roadways and separating users mitigates many of the road hazards.

While all the users have a response, responsibility to ensure that they use the shared space safely.

Ultimately, the driver of a motor v motor vehicle should have the greatest responsibility.

The staff proposed making changes to Braddock Road to include adding bike lanes, parking removal, traffic changes, shortening crossing distances at intersections, and providing safer pedestrian crossings.

Staff's proposed changes were needed to meet the project goal to make it safer, easier, safer, and more comfortable for people all ages, abilities, and modes of travel to use Braddock Road.

And I would note that there was a discussion earlier about coming up with alternate routes for uh people to ride bikes.

That still won't make Braddock Road safer.

Um there are people who will ride a bike regardless of a bike lane somewhere else.

I mean, there are people who do people ride on Braddock Road now, it's not safe, but they write on it.

So moving those users to these alternate routes doesn't make the road safer.

You're still back to having to deal with the engineering.

So you could create uh a mode to just block off lots of the road or maybe impose a requirement that everybody has to park on the road uh on Braddock Road.

There can't be empty parking spaces.

Uh those are the most dangerous kinds of uh spaces that you have because drivers want you to move over to the empty space.

Um thank you, Mr.

Keene.

At this time, I will open it up for questions, and when we do questions, um somebody can ask invite you to get to some of the things you might not have.

I'm sorry, I was I told I was told they had 10 minutes.

That was the 10.

That was 10 minutes.

I got okay.

Um, but we we have an opportunity for questions, and so if there's something you can get to, we can get to it.

Okay.

Um let me open it up to my colleagues to see if there are questions for our chair.

Okay.

Um at this time I don't think there are any questions, but thank you.

Yep, thank you very much.

Okay.

So now we are going to move to public comment um from the community.

So a couple things about how we will structure this part of the day.

We so a few things.

One, there is an overflow room, and I know that there are a number of people in that room.

What I'm gonna try and do is call speakers four at a time so that um if you are in the overflow room, I'm speaking directly to you.

Uh, but if you hear your name, staff will work with you so that we can begin to move you from the cafe over here so that we're not having any delay.

What I will say though is for fire code reasons, we can't have people line up.

So just be holding when your number is, but please don't get up out of your seat and start to form a line along along the wall.

There are staff in the hallway as well as staff in the cafe who are um available for questions and who are able to help move people back and forth.

We're gonna ask everyone's help and patience as we try and proceed efficiently and respectfully.

And uh just a few other notes, some of which we've covered already.

If you have signs, you're able to use those.

We would just ask that you be mindful of those who are behind you or next to you so that we're not blocking the view of the presentation.

We also um again, it's okay to snap or give thumbs up.

I'm gonna ask again, please don't clap only because it's like the echo that it makes it harder for us to get to the next person, and we don't want somebody to be speaking and then their testimony not be heard or um not paid attention to.

Again, everyone will have three minutes.

I am gonna try and keep us all to the time.

There's that little ding.

It's maybe not as loud as I thought it was, but um, it's just listen, listen for the bell.

And with that, I'm going to call our first four speakers.

Speaker one is Elena Hutchinson.

Speaker two is Brian Egan's.

Speaker three is William Busher, speaker four is James Masselli.

Um, with that, we'll start with Ms.

Hutchinson.

Hi, everybody.

Uh, my name is Elena Hutcheson.

I am a mom.

I'm a cyclist.

I'm the vice president of the DRCA.

And I'm gonna attempt to wear three hats in three minutes and uh set a tone for the afternoon.

So, hat number one, uh, I built the website, betterbraddock.org.

We built that site because we kept hearing a story that we knew wasn't true, that no one wants these improvements, that there's only eight cyclists on Braddock, that the only people who would support bike lanes on Braddock are uh spandex clad bike bros, which as you can see, I am not.

So we asked the community to sign on and to tell their stories, and to date we've had almost 200 people do exactly that.

What's striking to me is a lot of those people don't talk about biking, they talk about driving and not being sure what to do behind a cyclist in a shareau, or they talk about walking and a near miss in a crosswalk.

They talk about their kid going to GW and wanting them to have a safe way to get there.

Uh those testimonials are in your email.

I'm here to testify that I built that site.

Those are real neighbors.

Uh, I approved every single one of them.

Hat number two.

I'm the vice president of the DRCA.

Uh, you have our letter.

I'm not gonna belabor that either.

But I do want to emphasize that in Del Ray, this was not particularly controversial.

Um, our membership voted 70% to 30% in favor of this proposal.

We did that after engaging with TNES for over a year.

We walked to the corridor together.

Alex Carroll spent two late nights with us answering any question we had, first from our committee, then from our membership, uh, including a lot of Rosemont neighbors as well.

In the end, I think our members saw this plan the way I see it.

It's a win-win-win.

It makes the street safer, it connects a disconnected cycling network, it makes traffic operations better for people driving.

Hat number three.

I'm a mother and a cyclist.

I ride a bright pinky bike, it's got a kid's seat on the back, it can carry a remarkable number of groceries.

It's our family's second car.

I wrote it here today from Del Ray, which involved a lot of trails uh through Arlington, candidly.

But the last mile Google Maps gave me was a Cheryl on Beauregard.

Uh that's exactly the kind of unsafe recommendation that somebody gets regarding Braddock Road on the other end of the city today.

My actual route took me an hour to find, and it involved riding on a sidewalk and then through the backs of two parking lots.

And just because I made that work doesn't mean that's a fair or a safe or an equitable or a reasonable thing to ask cyclists to do long term.

Streets are for people, and people shouldn't have to avoid intersections or not let our kids bike or take a bunch of indirect surface streets to get where we're going because the city has chosen to only give direct routes to cars.

You're all up there because you believe like I do that streets are amenities for the whole community.

You believe in the equity and the vibrancy that walking and biking and transit bring to Alexandria.