HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kawai@csli.stanford.edu (goh kawai - n6uok)
Subject: Linguistic Data Consortium
Keywords: speech databases, linguistic data consortium, LDC, DARPA, NIST
Organization: speech research program, sri international
Distribution: fj
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:57:43 GMT

$@$_$J$5$s(J

$@002=@.$N>16-$5$s$+$i!"$D$.$N$h$&$J$4<ALd$r$$$?$@$-$^$7$?!#$_$J$5$s$K$b$44X?4(J
$@$N$*$"$j$JJ}$,$*$i$l$k$+$H;W$$!"Ej9F$7$^$9!#(J

  | From: makoto@awabi.asahi-kasei.co.jp
  | Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1992 18:03:09 +0900
  | To: kawai@speech.sri.com
  | Subject: NIST
  |
  | $@#D#A#R#P#A$d#N#I#S#T$N#C#D!]#R#O#M$N2;@<%G!<%?%Y!<%9$rF~<j$7$?$$$H9M$($F(J
  | $@$$$k$N$G$9$,!$O"Mm@h!$%G!<%?$N<oN`!$2A3J$J$I>pJs$r$*;}$A$G$7$?$i!$65$($F(J
  | $@$$$?$@$1$J$$$G$7$g$&$+!)(J

$@#L#D#C!J#L#i#n#g#u#i#s#t#i#c!!#D#a#t#a!!#C#o#n#s#o#r#t#i#u#m!K$K$*Ld$$9g$o$;(J
$@2<$5$$!#O"Mm@h$O!"(J

	The Linguistic Data Consortium
	441 Williams Hall
	University of Pennsylvania
	Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305

	phone: (215)898-0464
	  fax: (215)573-2175
	email: ldc@unagi.cis.upenn.edu

$@#L#D#C$,2;@<%G!<%?$NG[I[$rD4@0$7$F$$$^$9!#G[I[$5$l$k2;@<%G!<%?$N0lNc$H$7$F!"(J

	DARPA$@Ds6!$N2;@<%G!<%?(J
	  TIMIT (Texas Instruments and Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
	  RM (Resource Management)
	  ATIS (Air Travel Information System)
	  SWITCHBOARD
	  ATC (Air Traffic Control)

        Edinburgh University$@Ds6!$N$b$N(J
          MAPTASK

        $@$3$NB>$$$m$$$m(J

$@$3$N$[$+!"%F%-%9%H%G!<%?$bG[I[$5$l$^$9!#(J

$@%G!<%?$N0lMw$r%?%$%W$9$k$N$,$?$$$X$s$J$N$G!">pJs$r$44uK>$NJ}$OD>@\#L#D#C$K$*(J
$@Ld$$9g$o$;2<$5$$!#$=$N:]!"(J

        LDC newsletter, volume 1, number 1 (October 1992)

$@$rAw$C$FM_$7$$$H;XDj$J$5$l$P!"0lMwI=$rAw$C$F$/$l$^$9!#(J

$@#L#D#C$O2q0w@)$r<h$C$F$*$j!"2q0w!JBg3X!&8&5f=j!&4k6H$J$I!K$O0lDj3[$N2qHq$r<}(J
$@$a$l$P!"2;@<%G!<%?$d%F%-%9%H%G!<%?$NG[I[$r$9$Y$F<u$1$i$l$k$3$H$K$J$C$F$$$^$9!#(J
$@1DMxCDBN$N2qHq$OG/#2#0#0#0#0%I%k!"Hs1DMxCDBN$N2qHq$OG/#2#0#0#0%I%k$G$9!#(J

$@F|K\$N8&5f=j$K2;@<%G!<%?$rG[I[$7$F$/$l$k$N$+!"G[I[$7$F$/$l$k$H$9$l$P$$$/$iHq(J
$@MQ$,$+$+$k$+!"$J$I$K$D$$$F$O!";d$OD>@\>pJs$r;}$A$^$;$s$N$G!"D>@\$*Ld$$9g$o$;(J
$@2<$5$$!#(J

$@!]2O9g!](J

----------------- Speech Research Program, SRI, Menlo Park, CA 94025-3493 USA
--- Goh Kawai --- work:(415)859-2231   fax:(415)859-5984   home:(415)323-7214
----------------- internet: kawai@speech.sri.com      radio: n6uok and 7l1fqe
From: sugi@atr-la.atr.co.jp (Masahide Sugiyama)
Newsgroups: fj.comp.speech
Subject: annual schedule  of SP meeting (IEICE & ASJ)
Date: 5 Jan 93 08:27:22 GMT
Distribution: fj
Organization: ATR International, Japan



  $@#9#3G/EY$N2;@<8&(J$@5f2q$NG/4V7W2h$r$*CN$i$;CW$7$^$9!#(J

  $@#47n(J $@5Y2q(J
  $@#57n(J $@2;@<@8@.(J, $@9g@.(J, $@0lHL(J  KDD $@8&5f=j(J                         5/20,21/93 (Th,Fr)
  $@#67n(J $@2;@<G'<1(J              $@4d<jBg3X(J		                6/17,18/93 (Th,Fr)
  $@#77n(J $@2;@<D03P(J,             $@6bBt9)6HBg3X(J     $@D03P8&5f2q$H6&:E(J  7/22,23/93 (Th,Fr)
  $@#87n(J $@0lHL(J                  $@N05eBg3X(J			        8/19,20/93 (Th,Fr)
  $@#97n(J $@5Y2q(J								                        
$@#1#07n(J $@?.9f=hM}(J              $@L>8E20Bg3X(J       DSP $@8&5f2q$H6&:E(J 10/14,15/93 (Th,Fr)
$@#1#17n(J $@9q:]%o!<%/%7%g%C%W(J    $@AaBg3X9q:]2q5D>l(J ($@9q:](JWorkshop)   11/ 8, 9/93 (Mo,Tu)
$@#1#27n(J $@2;@<G'<1M}2r(J          $@1'ET5\Bg3X(J       NLU $@8&5f2q$H6&:E(J 12/ 9,10/93 (Th,Fr)
  $@#17n(J $@0lHL(J                  $@5~ETBg3X(J           	        1/20,21/94 (Th,Fr)
  $@#27n(J $@Id9f2=!"?.9f=hM}(J      $@5!3#?66=2q4\(J		        2/17,18/94 (Th,Fr)
  $@#37n(J $@2;@<D03P(J              $@ElBg(J $@2;@<8&(J      $@D03P8&5f2q$H6&:E(J  3/24,25/94 (Th,Fr)

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
             $@?y;32m1Q(J    ATR $@<+F0K]LuEEOC8&5f=j(J $@2;@<>pJs=hM}8&5f(J$@<<(J 
			 $@")(J 619-02 $@5~ETI\Aj3Z74@:2ZD.8wBf(J 2-2 
                         07749-5-1374 sugi@atr-la.atr.co.jp
Newsgroups: fj.comp.printers
From: asami@minnie.ai.kyutech.ac.jp (Ken'ichi Asami)
Subject: ps printer drivers
Organization: Kyushu Institute of Technology, Iizuka, JAPAN.
Distribution: fj
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:13:31 GMT

$@@u3$!w6e9)Bg(J$@$H$$$$$^$9!#(J

Tgif+ $@$G:n$C$?4A;z$r4^$`(Jeps $@$r(JTeX $@$G<h$j9~$s$G(JPostScript $@%W%j%s%?$G=P(J
$@NO$5$;$?$$$N$G$9$,(J$@!"4A;z(JPS$@%W%j%s%?$G$O$J$$$N$G(JGhostScript $@$r%U%#%k%?$K(J
$@$7$F!"%S%C%H%^%C%W$KE83+$7$F$+$i$J$i(JPS$@%W%j%s%?$G(J$@$b=PNO$G$-$k$N$G$O$J$$(J
$@$+$H;W$C$F$$$^$9!#(J
$@$=$N$h$&$J$3$H$O2DG=$J$N$G$7$g$&$+!)(J
$@$=$3$G!"(JGhostScript $@$N(JPS$@%W%j%s%?$N%I%i%$%P$H$7$F$N;HMQK!!"@_DjK!$J$I$"(J
$@$j$^$7$?$i!"65$($F$$$?$@$1$J$$$G$7$g$&$+!#(J

$@$h$m$7$/(J$@$*4j$$$7$^$9!#(J
--
	$@6e=#9)6HBg3XBg3X1!(J $@>pJs9)3X8&5f2J(J $@>pJs2J3X@l96(J
	$@@u3$(J $@8-0l(J (asami@minnie.ai.kyutech.ac.jp)
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Muni Token Silliness
Date: 11 Jan 93 21:37:48 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <LAU.93Jan11123755@sunset.ai.sri.com> lau@sunset.ai.sri.com (Stephen Lau) writes:
>
>Here is a true story about those new Muni Tokens. [...]

Can you buy them direct from MUNI? I thought the Presido bus yard had
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Date: 7 Jan 93 23:19:53 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <jyc.726446059@Leland> jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis) writes:
>
>   This is an absolutely atrocious idea.  Currently the worst thing
>about Caltrain is that you have to get off in the middle of nowhere
>South of Market, transfer to a Muni bus to get down town, and then often
>transfer to another bus or streetcar there.  The only thing I can
>imagine worse than this would be to have to get off the train in the
>godforsaken boondocks of San Bruno to start the whole same process.
>

Well put, the new system would be no worse than the one now in your
case, (still only one boondocks), better than that for lots of people
(anyone who can't catch a direct bus from 4th and Townsend to where
they want to go, but for whom a BART station is their final
destination, like all of the East Bay for example), and cuts out 23%
of the system (allowing the number of trains each day to increase
while keeping the same number of miles per day), and removes one
county from the system (San Francisco), the county whose needs are the
most different out of the three. Its incorrect to compare this scheme
with a downtown station, because this scheme not only doesn't cost a
dime, it saves major money (the system has shunk).

Plus, timing the transfer at San Bruno is a definite possibility, look
how BART times transfers on off-peak hours (20 minute headways) at
Macaurther (the timing works very well in practice, I take advantage
of it daily). 

Also, San Bruno will be the airport light-rail transfer stop, which 
makes it not-quite-the-boondocks 4th and Townsend is ...
From: mikel@dosbears.UUCP (Mike Lipsie)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Date: 8 Jan 93 04:17:54 GMT
Reply-To: dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
Organization: DOS Bears

In article <1993Jan7.230704.2696@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
>In article <1993Jan6.230216.21279@pbhya.PacBell.COM>, whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
>
>Actually, CalTrain has a pretty strong reverse commute.  If they made
>an effort to get that market it might be pretty balanced.  

I think I read [in the Chronicle within the last month] that the
number of people who live in SF and commute to Silicon Valley is
now larger than the reverse.  CalTrain is still geared to those
working in SF.  It may be that the "nerds" who work in the Valley
won't take public transit but it would be nice if they were given
an option.

>|> No doubt CalTrain knows where folks get on--but do they know where folks
>|> get *off*.  Wtihout the later datum, the 'miles' part of the equation is
>|> pure guesswork.
>
>If I remember the statistics correctly, the average CalTrain rider rides
>about 22 miles while the average BART rider rides something like 11 miles.
>I don't know how CalTrain figured this out, but I understand that they
>do conduct passenger surveys and on-board passenger counts and with a
>little statistical analysis, it seems like you can figure such stuff out
>pretty easily.

BART can determine easily (it's a "simple matter of programming") at just
which stations each passenger got on and off.  I would expect their
statistics to be rather correct.

CalTrain has two methods of getting the information -- both less
accurate.  One is to ask the passengers (passenger surveys) and
the other is by counting the tickets sold.  Each ticket is marked
with a zone on and a zone off.  Of course zones are far less
exact than stations and it doesn't account for monthly tickets
but "with a little statistical analysis"you should be able to
get accurate enough numbers.
 
--
Mike Lipsie                            584 Castro #614, San Francisco, CA 94114
dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
mikel%dosbears.uucp@ingres.com    Running rn (for DOS) with UUPC/Extended 1.11k
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Date: 7 Jan 1993 01:30:02 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: ba
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1993Jan7.005552.28623@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
In article <1993Jan5.234845.6113@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) write
>>Instead of such a cheap, easy
>>extension, we can now wallow in the newer more wonderful $600+ million
>>plans that we are being "offered".  There are a lot of folks who will
>>do anything they can to torpedo the downtown extension and CalTrain in
>>general.  It's definitely a threat to BART's "manifest destiny", a
>>major thorn in BART's side.  Making sure that anything having to do
>>with CalTrain is gold-plated to the max and controversial as possible
>>serves the anti-CalTrain agenda well.  A lot of these BARTians aren't
>>dumb.  They know that an upgraded CalTrain can and will show up BART
>>in a big way.

The most obvious solution to the Caltrain downtown problem is not only
free, its a money-saver and (latency) performance enhancer. Let
Caltrain terminate at the shared BART/Caltrain San Bruno station, and
make everyone transfer to BART. You lose ~20 minutes off of building
the downtown Caltrain station, but right now you lose almost that much
by transferring to MUNI at 4th and Townsend, so the system gets no worse
in that regard than what presently runs. But look at what you gain:

1) Caltrain is now 23% shorter, which means the number of trains per day
can be increased without increasing the number of miles per day. 

2) Cost savings of closing the 4th and Townsend station; the San Bruno
station will be a BART station, so let BART pay for staffing it and
answering user questions, and make the Caltrain-half automated with
ticket machines.

3) East bay is serviced with just one connection, not two as is it now.

If we're really talking about being cost-conscious and not
territorial, this is the way for Caltrain to go; it reduces the size
of the system without decreasing service from the present system, and
increases frequency at the same number of miles per day.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis)
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date:  9 Jan 93 21:43:23 GMT



   As a thought exercise to evaluate the San Bruno/Caltrain option under
discussion here, imagine that Caltrain now went to the Ferry Building.
What would you think of some one who piped up, "Hey, I've got a great
idea -- let's make Caltrain stop at San Bruno instead!"

   The point of the exercise is that even if we admit for the sake of
argument that a San Bruno terminus is better than a 4th and Townsend
Terminus, it's still the case that a San Bruno terminus is a
ridiculously poor second to the only sensible option, which is a Ferry
Building or Transbay terminus.  In other words, the best argument that
can be made for the San Bruno option is that it is somewhat less stupid
than the present situation.  This is a case where the better, if it is
better, is still the enemy of the good.   
Xref: sparky ba.transportation:3117 rec.railroad:10498
From: jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis)
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Distribution: ba
Date:  9 Jan 93 21:37:38 GMT

mikel@dosbears.UUCP (Mike Lipsie) writes:

>There are NOT "fairly good" connections.  The 42 runs every 10-15
>minutes during rush hours (30 minutes othertimes).  The 15 runs every 
>5-10 minutes.  The 15/45 runs frequently (average about every 3
>minutes between them).  ALL of those lines go across Market near
>a BART stop.  Only the 32 (which runs every 10-15 minutes at rush
>hour and does not serve 4th&Townsend during midday) does not go
   But you left out the most useful line:  the 30-Stockton runs I think
every 3 to 5 minutes during peak hours and every 10-15 minutes on
weekends.  I'm not sure of the exact schedules, but I know I have very
rarely had to wait more than a few minutes for the 30 at the depot even
on Sundays.  And that bus tales you without transfer to or within an
easy walk of Downtown, the Financial District, Chinatown, North Beach,
Fisherman's Wharf, and the Marina.  
From: dsherman@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Daniel P. Sherman)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:52:49 GMT
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
From: "Michael Smith" <p00004@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Organization: Performance Systems Int'l
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 21:24:00 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink-DOS (3.3)

>DATE:   5 Jan 93 16:50:10 GMT
>FROM:   Wilson Heydt <whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM>
[....]
>Nice dodge.  The question isn't "How can we increase private vehicle
>occupancy?", but rather "Are *all* those trains full?"  If the answer
>to that later question is "No", then capacities that assume they are
>are highly misleading.  No one has argued that with the *vehicle*
>capacity of a freeway lane.  Heck...  Many of us are willing to have
>the rough computations assumme 1.000 people per car.  The bias creeps
>in when you count passengers on the train *as*if*every*train*were*full*
>rather than on average occupancy.

But aren't we talking here about comparisons of *capacity*? The capacity 
of a railroad depends on seats per train times trains per hour. The 
railroad can sell a ticket for every seat. The analogy to seats per car 
is false, since the turnpike authority (or whoever) can't force drivers 
to fill up empty seats with users who arrive for service sans car. -- Or 
rather, I suppose it theoretically *could*, but surely nobody is 
suggesting this?

--Michael Smith

Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: bm@bike2work.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill Michel)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Bicycles to commute within a work campus: Any successes ?
Keywords: bicycles work
Date: 7 Jan 93 22:54:29 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Sun
NNTP-Posting-Host: bike2work

Loral Space Systems in Palo Alto has "company bicycles" for 
its employees to use in getting around their campus.

Bill

In article <1992Dec23.201739.2476@netcom.com> jaxtell@netcom.com (Joseph Axtell) writes:
>Hi,
>
>Does anyone work for or know of a company that encourages its workers to 
>get between the buildings of a spread out (1/2 mile) campus ?
>
>A company I have in mind has a large central campus, and a large sub-campus
>consisting of 2 buildings, 1/2 mile away, seperated by 2 different streets 
>that are both speed limited to 35 miles per hour.
>
>My idea is that this company buy 3 or 4 bikes and leave them parked at
>racks that are at a known spot in front of each campus.
>
>I feel soooo silly getting in my car to go between campuses.  And the distance
>is just a little too far to do your work and travel between the two 4 times a 
>day.
>
>Detailed solutions welcome :) !
>
>


--
Bill Michel			
bm@eng.sun.com		These views are my own, not Sun's.
From: teruya@rogue.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Bicycles to commute within a work campus: Any successes ?
Date: 5 Jan 93 00:34:21 GMT
Distribution: ba

In article <28141@dog.ee.lbl.gov>, b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman) writes:
> In article <1992Dec23.201739.2476@netcom.com>, jaxtell@netcom.com (Joseph
> Axtell) writes:

> |> Does anyone work for or know of a company that encourages its workers to 
> |> get between the buildings of a spread out (1/2 mile) campus ?

> |> <<rest deleted>>

> I've always been under the impression that IBM had/has bikes for this
> purpose in its big campus south of San Jose.

> I also think (not certain) that Lawrence Livermore Lab does this too.

     There is a fleet of orange bicycles throughout our site (about a square
mile).  If you are going from one building to another you just grab the
first one you come to, throw your stuff in the basket, and go.  It is usually
pretty convenient, although there have been times when I've walked all
the way to where I was going before stumbling upon one.

     LLNL had to write a specification a few years ago because several
people were hurt when bike frames broke.  Because they are often used by women
wearing skirts, the bikes have to be of the "girl's" type, but the bikes are
also used by 250+ pound men.  The result was a design with reinforcement at
critical points.  I don't know who manufactured them.

> [Stuff deleted]

> Having a guarded site no doubt makes this more feasible.

     Agreed.  We've got guards with weapons standing at all the gates
to make sure no one rides off with an orange bike. :-)

> [Rest deleted]

Alan Teruya
teruya1@llnl.gov
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: sanjiv@projtech.com (Sanjiv Gossain)
Subject: getting from SJ to east bay
Organization: Project Technology, Inc., Berkeley, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:05:03 GMT

Can anyone tell me what is the best way to get
from the San Jose area to the East Bay (around Oakland/berkeley)
on public transportation. This would be a one off trip.

Any help/advice appreciated.

Cheers

Sanjiv
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: mikel@dosbears.UUCP (Mike Lipsie)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Date: 11 Jan 93 03:34:58 GMT
Reply-To: dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
Organization: DOS Bears

In article <jyc.726615803@Leland> jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis) writes:
>
>   As a thought exercise to evaluate the San Bruno/Caltrain option under
>discussion here, imagine that Caltrain now went to the Ferry Building.
>What would you think of some one who piped up, "Hey, I've got a great
>idea -- let's make Caltrain stop at San Bruno instead!"

But it doesn't.

So the exercise is "what is a better use of our transit money?"
The BART/CalTrain transfer point WILL exist.  The CalTrain to
downtown may never exist.  I agree with John (I hope I got it
right this time :-), let's let the CalTrain passengers vote
with their feet (and dollars, BART does not have a monthly pass)
once the transfer point is completed.
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: Cars as "something better"
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:10:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.061750.19556@unet.net.com>, larson@loren.net.com (Alan Larson) writes:
|> What am I to do?  Give up my job, my slightly affordable house, or my
|> life?  Not everyone is a drone who only goes from home to work and back.

Yes, but many are.  Also, many of us non-drones have many days where
we know we're just going to be going to work and back.  If folks that
are drones or who can manage transit some of the time took it, it'd
leave a lot more room on the roads for people that really need to
drive on any particular day.

Just because there are lots of people who can't (or won't) use transit
for one reason or another, doesn't mean there aren't lots of people who
can and gladly would--if it were only better...

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Xref: sparky ba.transportation:3047 la.general:1152 oc.general:142
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,la.general,oc.general
Subject: Re: I hate "Rapid" Transit District (RTD)
Keywords: rapid RTD transport
Date: 6 Jan 93 23:47:22 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In article <1993Jan6.192459.22970@gordian.com>, mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas) writes:
> In article <ugtdpf0@sgi.sgi.com>, jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
> > Putting in service to the airport was probably very expensive, as
> > it is here in San Francisco.  Transferring to an airport shuttle
> > bus doesn't seem all that onerous if it runs frequently enough.
> > Another problem with airport service is that it would probably
> > have to be the end of a line, or force a substantial deviation.
> > They probably wanted to get riders to/from Manhattan Beach too.
> 
>   Bzzt. Logan in Boston is heaven on earth compared to SF and it's
> brain dead lack of Bart. With as much money as they are spending
> anyway, they can at least make the routes go to destination which
> have some basis in reality...

Well, Mr. Bzzt, I think you just made both my points very well.  Taking
the subway to Logan requires a transfer to a shuttle bus.  Assuming
it doesn't get derailed (heh heh), SF will have a shuttle car that
takes you from an external airport Caltrain/BART station into the
terminals.  It sounds like LAX is planning something similar.

jeremy
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Kopp Capitulates!
Keywords: BART SFO CalTrain
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 01:29:21 GMT


At yesterday's CalTrain Joint Powers Board meeting, Senator Quentin
Kopp (I-San Francisco - San Mateo) said he would withdraw his initiative
ordinance, rewrite it, and re-submit it.  He has been taking a lot of
heat thanks to the efforts of myself and others.  The reason is that
Section 4 of the text of his proposed ordinance effectively killed any
chance of the airport building its planned people mover system ahead
of the BART link into the airport.  More importantly, it also banned
the people mover from looping across to the west side of Highway 101
to link with an intermodal CalTrain/BART/SamTrans station.

Since Kopp will be changing his ordinance, he and his "Good Government
Committee" will have to start their signature-gathering effort all
over again for the revised version.

I applaud Kopp for making this move now (however self-serving it may
be, since if he hadn't, the whole thing might have gone down in flames.)
Many groups and politicians were already working hard behind the scenes
to line up opposition to Kopp's plan.  Now that he says he'll take the
objectionable people-mover-to-CalTrain-killer language out, people
will probably not be as likely to oppose the ordinance so vigorously.
Co-mingling the BART-into-SFO issue with the people-mover link to
CalTrain in 1997 plan was a bad idea.  Depending on the wording of
the new version, it might be allowed to live or die on its own
merits (or lack thereof!) this time...

Stay tuned.

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Xref: sparky ba.transportation:2999 sci.environment:14267 ca.environment:1146
From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,sci.environment,ca.environment
Subject: Re: Natural Gas?
Date: 4 Jan 93 04:32:01 GMT
Organization: Unocal Corporation

The LA Times today describes a "super-microbe" that makes ethonal out of most biomass materials.
Helps solve two problems: energy and waste.  Will probably be commercialized in Brazil first
where there is a financial incentive for ethonal.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation