<?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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Transbay Likely to be One of Two Stations for HSR in San Francisco</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/04/11/transbay-likely-to-be-one-of-two-stations-for-hsr-in-san-francisco/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/04/11/transbay-likely-to-be-one-of-two-stations-for-hsr-in-san-francisco/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:43:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: switchingmodes</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/04/11/transbay-likely-to-be-one-of-two-stations-for-hsr-in-san-francisco/#comment-895</link>
		<dc:creator>switchingmodes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 07:28:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetransportpolitic.com/?p=1920#comment-895</guid>
		<description>I have posted a commentary regarding solutions to the capacity restraints of the new terminal on my blog at, http://switchingmodes.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/why-the-transbay-terminal-two-station-solution-is-flawed/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have posted a commentary regarding solutions to the capacity restraints of the new terminal on my blog at, <a href="http://switchingmodes.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/why-the-transbay-terminal-two-station-solution-is-flawed/" rel="nofollow">http://switchingmodes.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/why-the-transbay-terminal-two-station-solution-is-flawed/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yonah Freemark</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/04/11/transbay-likely-to-be-one-of-two-stations-for-hsr-in-san-francisco/#comment-893</link>
		<dc:creator>Yonah Freemark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:44:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetransportpolitic.com/?p=1920#comment-893</guid>
		<description>Thanks Rafael for the clarification.
For me, the question is really whether the high-speed rail component should be connected to the Transbay Center - and honestly, I think I fall on the side of those who think that it&#039;s absolutely necessary. It&#039;s not that an underground station cannot necessary work - Penn Station, the worst of the worst, still works. But I think that we can agree that Transbay&#039;s upper portions, crowded as they might become, will be a fantastic entry point into the city for those on HSR - and that as a result, there&#039;s a good reason to push it as a station for the line. Even though the platforms will be underground, you&#039;ll go through a grand concourse above ground before exiting into the city.

Your criticisms of the tunnel, of course, are completely reasonable, and may suggest that the Transbay connection won&#039;t work anyhow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Rafael for the clarification.<br />
For me, the question is really whether the high-speed rail component should be connected to the Transbay Center &#8211; and honestly, I think I fall on the side of those who think that it&#8217;s absolutely necessary. It&#8217;s not that an underground station cannot necessary work &#8211; Penn Station, the worst of the worst, still works. But I think that we can agree that Transbay&#8217;s upper portions, crowded as they might become, will be a fantastic entry point into the city for those on HSR &#8211; and that as a result, there&#8217;s a good reason to push it as a station for the line. Even though the platforms will be underground, you&#8217;ll go through a grand concourse above ground before exiting into the city.</p>
<p>Your criticisms of the tunnel, of course, are completely reasonable, and may suggest that the Transbay connection won&#8217;t work anyhow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rafael</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/04/11/transbay-likely-to-be-one-of-two-stations-for-hsr-in-san-francisco/#comment-894</link>
		<dc:creator>Rafael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Apr 2009 22:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetransportpolitic.com/?p=1920#comment-894</guid>
		<description>I never said the Transbay Terminal Center building shouldn&#039;t be built, only that the two levels below ground should be eliminated in favor of a central train station 150 feet closer to downtown. And even that suggestion was born out of desperation, because the people who designed the DTX tunnel and train box in the bowels of the TTC did such a poor job. It&#039;s crazy to spend billions to bring heavy rail to a glorified bus stop.

The trains would be below ground either way, so I really don&#039;t see what your point is. Barcelona Sants is below ground as well - does that make it any less useful to passengers heading to Madrid or before long, Paris?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I never said the Transbay Terminal Center building shouldn&#8217;t be built, only that the two levels below ground should be eliminated in favor of a central train station 150 feet closer to downtown. And even that suggestion was born out of desperation, because the people who designed the DTX tunnel and train box in the bowels of the TTC did such a poor job. It&#8217;s crazy to spend billions to bring heavy rail to a glorified bus stop.</p>
<p>The trains would be below ground either way, so I really don&#8217;t see what your point is. Barcelona Sants is below ground as well &#8211; does that make it any less useful to passengers heading to Madrid or before long, Paris?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

