<?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: Towards a Functional Classification Replacement (Part Two)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pedshed.net/?feed=rss2&#038;p=240" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pedshed.net/?p=240</link>
	<description>Walkable urban design and sustainable places</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:26:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laurence Aurbach</title>
		<link>http://pedshed.net/?p=240&#038;cpage=1#comment-19137</link>
		<dc:creator>Laurence Aurbach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:43:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pedshed.net/?p=240#comment-19137</guid>
		<description>John, I believe it is patently obvious that the Meunster photo, as well as the Tampa photo, shows parked vehicles. The purpose of the photos is simply to illustrate a point, which is the amount of street space occupied by the vehicles themselves.

The more interesting and relevant question is how the spatial efficiency of the different modes compares when the vehicles, bikes, or people are moving. The UITP graph above shows spatial efficiency as the number of people moving through one lane width (or equivalent) per hour. The graph indicates that private autos are by far the most spatially inefficient mode. I suspect, however, that the graph might refer to theoretical maximums. It would be very useful and interesting to see more empirical data, from both average conditions and best-practice, ideal conditions in various countries.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, I believe it is patently obvious that the Meunster photo, as well as the Tampa photo, shows parked vehicles. The purpose of the photos is simply to illustrate a point, which is the amount of street space occupied by the vehicles themselves.</p>
<p>The more interesting and relevant question is how the spatial efficiency of the different modes compares when the vehicles, bikes, or people are moving. The UITP graph above shows spatial efficiency as the number of people moving through one lane width (or equivalent) per hour. The graph indicates that private autos are by far the most spatially inefficient mode. I suspect, however, that the graph might refer to theoretical maximums. It would be very useful and interesting to see more empirical data, from both average conditions and best-practice, ideal conditions in various countries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John S. Allen</title>
		<link>http://pedshed.net/?p=240&#038;cpage=1#comment-19135</link>
		<dc:creator>John S. Allen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pedshed.net/?p=240#comment-19135</guid>
		<description>The Muenster poster shows bicycles and vehicles stopped in the street, packed as tightly as possible -- not vehicles in motion, which use much more space and use it very differently. Please see http://john-s-allen.com/blog/?p=7</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Muenster poster shows bicycles and vehicles stopped in the street, packed as tightly as possible &#8212; not vehicles in motion, which use much more space and use it very differently. Please see <a href="http://john-s-allen.com/blog/?p=7" rel="nofollow">http://john-s-allen.com/blog/?p=7</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
