Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Craig Ragland (craigragland![]() |
|
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:48:35 -0800 (PST) |
Yes One concrete example I heard of is use of Graham Meltzer's research showing a smaller per-capita car ownership in cohousing to justify a lower requirement for number of parking spaces per unit. This saves the project money. I suspect others who have run the regulatory gauntlet may weigh in on the potential for policy shifts that makes cohousing projects easier, assuming we can get better information to justify some of the things we believe to be true about the ecological and social value of cohousing lifestyles. On 3/21/06, Martin Sheehy <martinsheehy [at] yahoo.com> wrote: > > Does anything meaningful ever come from these researches/surveys/studies?. > Marty. >
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project, (continued)
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project aamato, March 21 2006
- RE: Shadowlake Village Resident research project Lisa Poley, March 27 2006
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project Craig Ragland, March 21 2006
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project Martin Sheehy, March 21 2006
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project Craig Ragland, March 21 2006
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project Martin Sheehy, March 21 2006
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project Craig Ragland, March 21 2006
- Re: Shadowlake Village Resident research project Ann Zabaldo, March 22 2006
- Research on Cohousing [was Shadowlake Village Resident research project] Sharon Villines, March 22 2006
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.