From the clarification, it sounds like he might be trying to get at the issue of commuters parking in residential neighborhoods and using a trail to access Metro (of course, whether this was his original meaning, we don't know). Fortunately, the potential commuter problem has a safer and much better solution than trying to make neighborhoods bike/ped unfriendly. If there's a commuter parking problem, you simply institute a zone parking permit system.

by RichardatCourthouse on May 4, 2009 5:13 pm  

Sounds like typical backtracking/CYA to me.

by iammrben on May 4, 2009 5:23 pm  

It didn't really make sense before and still doesn't make sense. What does the trail have to do with undesirable anything? I can understand neighborhood parking issues--that's fine and a legitimate concern. But what does a trail do to contribute to that? Are there lots of criminals who bike up the W&OD and hit backyards that way? Would the same happen with new trails?

by ah on May 4, 2009 5:48 pm  

I thought his explanation (Dellinger's) meant just what RichatCourt said; commuters parking and walking on trail to get to metro.

by Bianchi on May 4, 2009 6:04 pm  

Well, I'm glad Mr. Dellinger replied. He is saying the right things now (though it would inspire more confidence if he got the W&OD's name right).

However, like iammrben, I simply don't believe this explanation for the earlier remarks. This is the first I've heard of anyone trying to claim that the noun "undesirables" means anything but people. Yes, commuter parking in residential neighborhoods is a valid concern. But did it sound like that's what Dellinger meant? His original words again:

"Unfortunately, what that's going to do also is bring the other undesirables into our neighborhoods," he said. "We need to talk to our supervisors and tell them, 'No. We don't want that.'"

That sounds like a classic appeal to "fear of the other" to me. I hate to criticize to someone who's willing to talk to bicyclist advocates - which is great - but that's exactly what it sounds like. Creeps are after your children, etc.

If his motives are indeed pure, he should learn to speak more carefully.

As for the commuter parking problem, of course the solution isn't to cancel the trails and keep walking difficult... it's zone parking permits and consistent enforcement, like Arlington does in the B-R corridor. Is this politically difficult in Fairfax County (or Vienna specifically) for some reason? I know I've seen zone parking signs elsewhere in the county.

by Scott F on May 5, 2009 12:33 am  

This is rubbish. I live within walking distance to the Vienna Metro. There are no random cars parked in neighboring areas, not even when there are major festivals/games/shows, whatever. He's just a typical politician.

by Liz on May 5, 2009 8:50 am  

Dellinger is correct in stating that there will be no parking lots at the four Metro stations. However, there will be parking; parking for bikes in racks and lockers. People from the surrounding neighborhoods will be able to ride to the stations and park their bikes. They won't be able to reach the stations without proper bike access. The most direct route to the stations located on Route 7 is through the stream valley park.

The Fairfax countywide trails plan indicates a future trail from the area to which Dellinger refers, to the Route 7 area. Even so, the shortest walk for someone parking in these neighborhoods will be a mile, a bit beyond what is considered the acceptable walking range of most people. And, it's relatively easy to create a residential parking district in a neighborhood to handle the parking problem if it did arise.

The trails committee rep for this district has proposed building a trail as indicated on the trails plan, from the end of Vesper Drive, through the stream valley, to the commercial area near Spring Hill Road. There is some local opposition to the proposal.

Most people favor the concept of trails and non-motorized access until there's a proposal for a trail at a specific location. Then if any of the nearby residents are opposed, it becomes nearly impossible to build the trail. That's one reason FABB mostly advocates for on-road bike facilities.

Re: undesirables, when Dellinger was asked about his comments at the recent candidate forum, he backtracked and talked about people parking in the neighborhood and that the solution is to provide parking at the Metro stations, which the Tysons Task Force and the Board of Supervisors have all rejected at counter to creating mixed-use, walkable/bikeable communities. However, one of the other candidates raised the specter of gangs riding Metro and terrorizing the neighborhoods surrounding the stations.

Some good could come of the controversy if the false concerns about parking and security are raised now and dealt with, and the larger community comes out in support of better bike and ped access in Tysons, Vienna, and surrounding communities.

by Bruce Wright on May 5, 2009 10:17 am  

Dellinger sounded better at the NEVCA hearing, but he still didn't make any sense to me. The metro stations are over a mile to the Vienna border and to any trail connection. I can see why some people might park in the Vienna neighborhood to go to Tysons if there is not enough parking there, but not to go to the metro. Having parking at the metro stations will not help Vienna much. It will still be the same drive time for most residents to these stations as it is to Dunn Loring and Vienna. I can see why McLean would like them because they currently do not have metro access other than West Falls Church which is to the east of most of McLean, but Vienna already has driving access to two metros. I can also see why Fairfax County does not want to create parking at the metro just for wealthy low density McLean residents. Creating parking at the metro stations will not only take away from a walkable Tysons, but will draw cars from the beltway into Tysons to park just so they can take the metro somewhere else. It might also increase traffic on 123 to these stations. The last thing the residents of Vienna want is more traffic down 123 and within Tysons. Dellinger is going to have to do some explaining why parking at these metro stations is so important at the expense of more traffic through and around Vienna. Dellinger has said he doesn't bike, so I'm not sure I'd trust him on any bicycle improvement decisions.

by Vienna Voter on May 5, 2009 12:18 pm  

At least he has backed off his comments. I watched the NARFE debate. What he said seemed pretty clear. But if he's backing off of his comments - flip flopping is allowed for pols - let's just make sure he's held to flopping the right way!

I live in a nice neighborhood with single family homes and tress walkable to Vienna Metro. We are not overrun with gangs. People don't park in our neighborhoods. I think he's full of hooey. But if his "I was misunderstood" tact ammounts to an apology to cyclists, I'll accept it from him. I don't expect "I'm sorry" from pols. They just don't know those words, it seems. Alas.

by Anne on May 7, 2009 12:44 pm  

Sorry, meant "trees."

by Anne on May 7, 2009 12:45 pm