<?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: An alternative that&#8217;s not politically sexy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theflackattack.com/2009/08/an-alternative-thats-not-politically-sexy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theflackattack.com/2009/08/an-alternative-thats-not-politically-sexy/</link>
	<description>…sparse and to the point.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 02:27:21 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: flackattack</title>
		<link>http://www.theflackattack.com/2009/08/an-alternative-thats-not-politically-sexy/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>flackattack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 02:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theflackattack.com/?p=80#comment-5</guid>
		<description>...sparse and to the point.  Bingo!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;sparse and to the point.  Bingo!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Virgilio Perez Pascoe</title>
		<link>http://www.theflackattack.com/2009/08/an-alternative-thats-not-politically-sexy/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Virgilio Perez Pascoe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theflackattack.com/?p=80#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s see:  I disagree with the term gluttonous.  It seems, to me, that this observation is sparse and to the point.   I presume you agree with developing the possibility of local public transportation (say like bike paths,  walking-friendly side-walks, and weekend bus rides to select parks and commercial centers.)

I know, I know--what you are suggesting is already too radical.  To add anymore is to make it beyond crazy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s see:  I disagree with the term gluttonous.  It seems, to me, that this observation is sparse and to the point.   I presume you agree with developing the possibility of local public transportation (say like bike paths,  walking-friendly side-walks, and weekend bus rides to select parks and commercial centers.)</p>
<p>I know, I know&#8211;what you are suggesting is already too radical.  To add anymore is to make it beyond crazy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.theflackattack.com/2009/08/an-alternative-thats-not-politically-sexy/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 01:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theflackattack.com/?p=80#comment-3</guid>
		<description>I recently read that Virginia, I believe the entire state, recently passed a law indicating that any new roads terminating in cul de sac or dead end would be considered private roads and their maintenance the responsibility of the property owners/developers.  Where I live is a maze of cul de sacs and isolated sub-divisions.  Most folks seem to prefer it that way and would not take kindly to me suggesting we open roads to connect where feasible.  My road is one of the few that actually connects two major arteries and over the years there have been plenty of requests to close off one end to stop transient traffic.  Emergency access has prevented any success which pleases me.  I appreciate having two ways in &amp; out.  However, to placate, the county made it illegal and difficult to turn left onto or from my road.  Concrete medians are in place to discourage along with regular police presence.

We are in accord.  What a pleasure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recently read that Virginia, I believe the entire state, recently passed a law indicating that any new roads terminating in cul de sac or dead end would be considered private roads and their maintenance the responsibility of the property owners/developers.  Where I live is a maze of cul de sacs and isolated sub-divisions.  Most folks seem to prefer it that way and would not take kindly to me suggesting we open roads to connect where feasible.  My road is one of the few that actually connects two major arteries and over the years there have been plenty of requests to close off one end to stop transient traffic.  Emergency access has prevented any success which pleases me.  I appreciate having two ways in &amp; out.  However, to placate, the county made it illegal and difficult to turn left onto or from my road.  Concrete medians are in place to discourage along with regular police presence.</p>
<p>We are in accord.  What a pleasure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

