« Buses and Ferries and Trains, Oh My! | Main | WABA Urges Safe Cycling as Bike Month Approaches »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ugh. Is this a common attitude in the Town of Vienna? That would explain why it has next to no transit and nearly all its businesses on one, bike-unfriendly, hopelessly congested arterial (123).

I grew up just south of Vienna. It's not a bad town, but has always seemed far from progressive. I hope I'm wrong and Vienna residents will vote this fearmonger out.

Oh, how cute! The obvious answer to crime and unpleasantness is public transit, the official carrier for the smelly, criminal, loud, annoying, and dangerous people of the District.

Scott, residents and politicians in Baltimore and Howard Counties have long argued that crime is to be blamed on proximity to bus, light rail, and subway routes.

Yeah, and like *roads* won't bring undesirables into the neighborhood? For "undesirables," substitute "teenagers."

Katherine, I'm not surprised. Keeping "undesirables" out is among the most common excuses for car-dependent design. It's just disappointing to me that Vienna might be that kind of place, but it would explain the state of transportation there. I also don't understand your first paragraph - are you making fun of me, or Dellinger?

I really can't tell if Katherine is being sincere. A quick parsing of her link makes me think she probably isn't, but I'm going to reply to a hypothetical assumption that she is.

This attitude is the most "undesirable" thing we could hope to get out of a discussion on the topic of transit. The fact that other counties have used transit as the whipping boy for their jingoism makes it okay here? Truly ugly and despicable; a tissue thin veil over racism, and overt classism.

By the way, does anyone understand when Dellinger refers to "other undesirables" what they are supposed to be other than? Was he discussing an initial set of undesirables earlier?

I'm confused about the hierarchy for "undesirables".
Mr. Dellinger's comments would indicate transit users are OK, but the trail users are the "undesirables" in the eyes of some in Vienna. But in Bethesda the "Committee to Save the Trail" (COST) circulated a letter among merchants years ago that stated that if the Purple Line is built transit riders will replace the CCT trail users and "The quality consumers who use the trail would no longer be there for you." So, some in Bethesda see transit riders as undesirable and prefer trail users.

Vienna and Bethesda NIMBY's should try to get on the same page.

Some Vienna residents have complained about day laborers. I'm betting that what he's on about. The same thing happened in Herndon last summer when a council member tried to enact all kinds of restrictions on bikes - just to get at day laborers. I use my bike to get around. I have a car (three of them, actually), but I don't like to drive when I can get where I need to get to without burning up the hydrocarbons.

What he now says he meant was that he didn't want people from out of town parking in the neighborhoods and then walking to the Metro. I'm updating this post now.

"What he meant to say"? Of course, now it all makes sense.

I totally buy that and am really relieved that he is such a reasonable person... I could not think of any way to resolve this issue of people parking close to the Metro in residential neigborhoods. Since that is a completely new phenomenon, I understand the concerns that Mr. Dellinger has about this. *sarcasm off*

At least he's been called on it.

He also claimed his comments were taken out of context.

I watched the debate. He said what he said pretty clearly.

Not a hard problem to solve - just require residential parking permits. That's what College Park does to prevent Metro station parking. I hope the people in the neighborhood speak up and say they want the trail.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader