<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Sightline InstituteBashing Bus Rapid Transit - Sightline Institute</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.sightline.org/2005/11/30/bashing_bus_rap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.sightline.org/2005/11/30/bashing_bus_rap/</link>
	<description>News and Views for a Sustainable Northwest</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 15:54:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>daily</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3</generator>
	
		<item>
		<title>Bashing Bus Rapid Transit</title>
		<link><![CDATA[https://www.sightline.org/2005/11/30/bashing_bus_rap/]]></link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[Bus rapid transit may have both bus and rail drawbacks. | The Strangertakes a crack at Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)&#8211;an alternative to fixed-rail technologies like light rail and monorail&#8212;and finds it wanting. Severely wanting. And while the short article isn&#8217;t the paragon of balanced issue analysis, it raises some compelling objections. Among them: BRT tends to have lower ridership, longer travel times, and fails to create incentives for land-use changes. There may even be reason to think that BRT&#8217;s oft-touted cost-effectiveness...]]></description>
					</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
