<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Seattlest: Washington is Best for Bikes</title>
<link>http://seattlest.com/2008/09/05/washington_is_best_for_bikes.php</link>
<description>All comments for Washington is Best for Bikes</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2009 seattle_james</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:30:00 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>scarequotes@gmail.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>scarequotes@gmail.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>bilco</title>
<link>http://seattlest.com/2008/09/05/washington_is_best_for_bikes.php#comment-1455502</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://seattlest.com/2008/09/05/washington_is_best_for_bikes.php#comment-1455502</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 22:15:38 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Earth to Seattle - the Burke-Gilman trail was fine in its day, but it has been bested over and over. It&apos;s in lousy, lousy shape, deferred maintenance really showing. 

I lived in Arlington, VA for a year, and I could bike to National airport on their bike trail while crossing a single road. The trail was always in much better shape than the B-G. Hell, the trail from Hailey, Idaho to Ketchum, in a heavy-winter climate is always in better shape. It&apos;s about 15 miles long as well.

Seattle needs to stop resting on its laurels and get to work making a top-grade bike system.

And, no, &apos;share-ons&apos;, or whatever the hell those things are, don&apos;t count&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>