<?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: November 2008 Election: No on Measure KK (Berkeley)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://transbayblog.com/2008/11/03/november-2008-election-no-on-measure-kk-berkeley/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/11/03/november-2008-election-no-on-measure-kk-berkeley/</link>
	<description>Transportation and urban planning in the San Francisco Bay Area</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 15:25:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: November 2008 Election: Results and Reflections &#171; Transbay Blog</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/11/03/november-2008-election-no-on-measure-kk-berkeley/#comment-6239</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[November 2008 Election: Results and Reflections &#171; Transbay Blog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:55:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbay.wordpress.com/?p=1971#comment-6239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] of the East Bay Regional Park District bond passed with over 71% of the vote. In Berkeley, Measure KK (which would have stalled AC Transit&#8217;s BRT project by requiring a vote in Berkeley to reserve [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of the East Bay Regional Park District bond passed with over 71% of the vote. In Berkeley, Measure KK (which would have stalled AC Transit&#8217;s BRT project by requiring a vote in Berkeley to reserve [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexandra V.</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/11/03/november-2008-election-no-on-measure-kk-berkeley/#comment-6227</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alexandra V.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 11:43:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbay.wordpress.com/?p=1971#comment-6227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Berkeley voters quite whelmingly voted No, hooray!  :D]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Berkeley voters quite whelmingly voted No, hooray!  :D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david vartanoff</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/11/03/november-2008-election-no-on-measure-kk-berkeley/#comment-6211</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[david vartanoff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 02:42:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbay.wordpress.com/?p=1971#comment-6211</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[as a regular rider of the 1/1R (and non driver) I DO NOT support AC Transit&#039;s BRT plans.  The fact is, rarely does Telegraph dam up slowing the buses except in the four block one way section immediately south of Cal.  There, the problems are delivery trucks not bothering to use commercial parkung spaces and sidewalk vendors parking in traffic lanes to load/unload their tables/merchandise.  This is a traffic control issue, not a reason to spend millions on a bus route lightly used evenings.  The one route where exclusive lanes would be useful is University which is much busier than Telegraph most hours and a zoo on Cal game weekends.   
The truly sad part of this fight is that even AC&#039;s own EIR admits the BRT plan will attract very few new transit riders while cannibalising BART..  Unlike in SF, AC  Transit competes w/ BART for riders and joint use passes no longer exist.  
As to signal preempts, those are already in place although they do not appear operative.  POP could be phased in anytime as a preponderance of southbound riders in Berkeley board w/passes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>as a regular rider of the 1/1R (and non driver) I DO NOT support AC Transit&#8217;s BRT plans.  The fact is, rarely does Telegraph dam up slowing the buses except in the four block one way section immediately south of Cal.  There, the problems are delivery trucks not bothering to use commercial parkung spaces and sidewalk vendors parking in traffic lanes to load/unload their tables/merchandise.  This is a traffic control issue, not a reason to spend millions on a bus route lightly used evenings.  The one route where exclusive lanes would be useful is University which is much busier than Telegraph most hours and a zoo on Cal game weekends.<br />
The truly sad part of this fight is that even AC&#8217;s own EIR admits the BRT plan will attract very few new transit riders while cannibalising BART..  Unlike in SF, AC  Transit competes w/ BART for riders and joint use passes no longer exist.<br />
As to signal preempts, those are already in place although they do not appear operative.  POP could be phased in anytime as a preponderance of southbound riders in Berkeley board w/passes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Berkeley ballot a referendum on Smart Growth &#171; FutureOakland</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2008/11/03/november-2008-election-no-on-measure-kk-berkeley/#comment-6209</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Berkeley ballot a referendum on Smart Growth &#171; FutureOakland]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 21:28:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbay.wordpress.com/?p=1971#comment-6209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] process does not comply with state law and makes development in Berkeley very difficult. Measure LL is a referendum on the City Council’s decision to update the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance to make it less [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] process does not comply with state law and makes development in Berkeley very difficult. Measure LL is a referendum on the City Council’s decision to update the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance to make it less [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

