<?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 InstituteStill Measuring Congestion Wrong - Sightline Institute</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.sightline.org/2011/01/24/still-measuring-congestion-wrong/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.sightline.org/2011/01/24/still-measuring-congestion-wrong/</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>Still Measuring Congestion Wrong</title>
		<link><![CDATA[https://www.sightline.org/2011/01/24/still-measuring-congestion-wrong/]]></link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 00:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[National congestion rankings leave traffic-watchers more bufuddled than ever. | How is the Texas Transportation Institute like Britney Spears? Oops, they did it again. Yes, the Texas Transportation Institute released their annual rankings of traffic congestion last week.  And for the second time in a decade, the report has undergone a complete change in methodology&#8212;one that&#8217;s rendered its previous congestion estimates moot.  And for the umpteenth time in a row, they&#8217;ve championed a measure of congestion that gets the relationship...]]></description>
					</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
