Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Matt Lawrence (matt![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 17:12:25 -0500 |
On Thu, 14 May 1998, Jim Willits wrote: > > I have to agree with robin ellison. the continued suburban sprawl with > "hip" new packaging ..."cohousing" is still just traditional suburban > sprawl. Urban restoration and village revitalization is the real need and > the unit costs can be very low by selecting the neighborhood. The economic > impact of a similar group investment into an existing neighborhood would be > very significant and could change the course of history for a particular > neighborhood. jim willits I think you are seriously lacking a clue. There are some cohousing projects that are located in urban areas. For example, take a look at the Doyle Street project. -- Matt
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness, (continued)
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness Jim Willits, May 14 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness Roman Bitner, May 14 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness dwn2erth, May 14 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness Jennifer S. Stevens, May 14 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness Matt Lawrence, May 15 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness Matt Lawrence, May 15 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness dwn2erth, May 16 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness Roman Bitner, May 16 1998
- Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness dwn2erth, May 16 1998
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.