<?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: New CT Board of Directors</title>
	<atom:link href="http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/</link>
	<description>Transit in the Greater Seattle Area</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:21:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: SuindElunda</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102676</link>
		<dc:creator>SuindElunda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102676</guid>
		<description>del.
Sorry, wrong topic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
del.<br />
Sorry, wrong topic.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Z</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102673</link>
		<dc:creator>Z</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 07:49:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102673</guid>
		<description>Because they already had a large fleet of articulateds. The cost to retrofit the facilities to support double deck equipment would be high, Maintenace bays and lifts would have to be made larger, bus washes rebuilt, clearances on routes checked, a lot of back end work, when artics work well for the area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
Because they already had a large fleet of articulateds. The cost to retrofit the facilities to support double deck equipment would be high, Maintenace bays and lifts would have to be made larger, bus washes rebuilt, clearances on routes checked, a lot of back end work, when artics work well for the area.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oran Viriyincy</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102658</link>
		<dc:creator>Oran Viriyincy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 06:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102658</guid>
		<description>The Double Tall is 14 ft high. Metro&#039;s overhead trolley wire is typically 16 to 18 feet above the street.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
The Double Tall is 14 ft high. Metro&#8217;s overhead trolley wire is typically 16 to 18 feet above the street.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102657</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 06:22:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102657</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m wondering how tall these are compared to trolley wires.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
I&#8217;m wondering how tall these are compared to trolley wires.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chetan</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102638</link>
		<dc:creator>Chetan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 04:30:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102638</guid>
		<description>do you know the reasoning behind the metro choice?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
do you know the reasoning behind the metro choice?<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shawn</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102623</link>
		<dc:creator>Shawn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102623</guid>
		<description>Since I live in Snohomish County I would not consider this notice about CT to be &quot;pointless trivia.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
Since I live in Snohomish County I would not consider this notice about CT to be &#8220;pointless trivia.&#8221;<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: abdiel</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102544</link>
		<dc:creator>abdiel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102544</guid>
		<description>I have unsubscribed from the STB. 

It used to be interesting, it no longer is. 

This would be acceptable if posting volume had dropped off, but it has not. Instead, STB now clutters up my RSS reader with pointless trivia.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
I have unsubscribed from the STB. </p>
<p>It used to be interesting, it no longer is. </p>
<p>This would be acceptable if posting volume had dropped off, but it has not. Instead, STB now clutters up my RSS reader with pointless trivia.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kenn</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102517</link>
		<dc:creator>kenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:42:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102517</guid>
		<description>CT bought the double decker busses last year. metro chose to stick with the attriculated buss.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
CT bought the double decker busses last year. metro chose to stick with the attriculated buss.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Variable</title>
		<link>http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/02/02/new-ct-board-of-directors/#comment-102513</link>
		<dc:creator>Variable</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://seattletransitblog.com/?p=11929#comment-102513</guid>
		<description>Why does CT have double decker and KC not? Seems like there are some routes where it would work well to have double decker buses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start --><br />
Why does CT have double decker and KC not? Seems like there are some routes where it would work well to have double decker buses.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (enhanced)
Database Caching using disk
Object Caching 269/274 objects using disk

Served from: seattletransitblog.com @ 2012-02-13 02:15:15 -->
