A recent court decision declaring the Lake Braddock Community Association's parking policies invalid has led to the repeal of a rule of two assigned parking spots per townhouse in the neighborhood. This decision came after a lengthy court battle, which reached a critical point in May.

The Lake Braddock community was up in arms at a Thursday night meeting at Lake Braddock Community Center. The meeting was so well attended by passionate and furious members of the neighborhood that the entire conference room of the  was full to the brim, with people pouring out the doors, forced to stand by propped open windows from the outside.

Inside the room itself, every seat was filled and every space occupied by a standing community member. Though the meeting was not only for parking, and the board had other matters within the community to discuss such as new benches, tennis court repairs, swim team meets, and fresh coats of paint, the community made it very clear that they had come to the meeting to discuss the inconvenient situation on their streets.

The previous week, the Lake Braddock Community Association board voted to repeal the previous parking policy in order to comply with a May 20 hearing, the culmination of a lawsuit filed in December against the Community Association by a community member.

The court decision held that the community’s parking and trash policies were invalid, as they were put into effect in 2006, before the board had the legal right to do so. The plaintiffs cited the original 1971 community declaration, a governing document that all homeowners associations must have to come into existence. The declaration, the plaintiffs claimed, did not grant the powers that the board used to put the 2006 parking and trash policies into effect. The judge’s decision was based on Virginia laws that constrict the authority of homeowners association boards, and the Supreme Court of Virginia case White vs. Boundary Association, which served as a precedent.

As a result, community members no longer have assigned and numbered parking spots, all signs allotting these assigned parking spots must be removed, and visitor hangtags are no longer valid. Though the Lake Braddock neighborhood remains private property, the lack of signage and assigned spots has created fear that people who do not live in the community and who are not guests may take up limited parking space and cause trouble.  Many homeowners were concerned that their neighborhoods, in the wake of this new parking policy, would be used as parking by Lake Braddock Secondary School students.

“If everybody can use a parking spot, how are we supposed to know who the Lake Braddock homeowners are?” Lake Braddock resident Faye Galstan said.

Other members of the community expressed fears about having to walk from distant parking spaces late at night if other people took all of the spots in front of their homes, which had previously been assigned specifically to them.

Though many were concerned and stressed about students and interlopers stealing spaces, others were not.

“I’m not afraid of people taking parking spaces, but they have stirred up people to believe that,” homeowner Bill Finnburg said.

Lawyers from the association’s insurance company and lawyers who generally counsel the association were on hand to address homeowner’s concerns. The board took questions and comments from community members, and reached a decision to try to amend the community declaration to include provisions that address the parking and trash issues.

This, however, is a daunting task for the large community, as the board must receive signatures from at least 75 percent of households in the community. Garnering support from over 950 households could take a long time. Though numerous members of the community stepped forward and volunteered their time to discuss issues in groups and canvass the neighborhood for support, the process remains a lengthy one.

Though the meeting started with much anger, fear, and confusion, by the end, members of the community expressed thanks to the board for their efforts, and volunteering to pitch in and work towards change.

Board president Barbara Branham reminded the crowd at the meeting that the board changed the long-standing policy to come in compliance with a court order.

“We [the board] are one of you,” Branham said. 

As the relevant court case is still pending, in terms of court fees, the lawyers at the meeting did not disclose any information regarding it, saying they did not want to incite a witch hunt for revealing names.