<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A SMART Pipe Dream</title>
	<atom:link href="http://transbayblog.com/2008/07/02/a-smart-pipe-dream/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/07/02/a-smart-pipe-dream/</link>
	<description>Transportation and urban planning in the San Francisco Bay Area</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 19:20:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/07/02/a-smart-pipe-dream/#comment-5444</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:51:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbay.wordpress.com/?p=500#comment-5444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Alexandra, sorry to say, but 20-30 years is more than a bit optimistic. Not sure if this would ever happen, nor is it really an immediate priority. This &#039;pipe dream&#039; extension would be extremely expensive, and assumes that the train would become popular enough to justify a metro type of treatment. But planned service levels, at least initially, are consistent with commuter rail; just about a dozen trains a day, maybe weekend service. The post is a transit dream that I tried to justify. For now, though, I&#039;ll just be happy if voters pass SMART, as proposed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Alexandra, sorry to say, but 20-30 years is more than a bit optimistic. Not sure if this would ever happen, nor is it really an immediate priority. This &#8216;pipe dream&#8217; extension would be extremely expensive, and assumes that the train would become popular enough to justify a metro type of treatment. But planned service levels, at least initially, are consistent with commuter rail; just about a dozen trains a day, maybe weekend service. The post is a transit dream that I tried to justify. For now, though, I&#8217;ll just be happy if voters pass SMART, as proposed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexandra V.</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/07/02/a-smart-pipe-dream/#comment-5443</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alexandra V.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:19:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbay.wordpress.com/?p=500#comment-5443</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cool.  So... I shall look forward to seeing some of this in 20-30 years then, eh? ;p]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cool.  So&#8230; I shall look forward to seeing some of this in 20-30 years then, eh? ;p</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

