<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Seattle overdoing it with density plans?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/</link>
	<description>This blog will focus on how Seattle shapes itself — its design, its planning and its aspirations.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:49:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/#comment-115</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 05:21:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/#comment-115</guid>
		<description>And it also ignores that much of the new density allowed in the multifamily update is conditional on low income or workforce housing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And it also ignores that much of the new density allowed in the multifamily update is conditional on low income or workforce housing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mhays</title>
		<link>http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/#comment-110</link>
		<dc:creator>mhays</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 14:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/#comment-110</guid>
		<description>Very good link Adam!  

The anti-density types do seem pretty clueless in their arguments, and the "open letter" does a good job of pointing out many of the holes.  

The zoned capacity claim ignores the concept that not everyone builds -- in fact, in any relatively short period, most typically don't.  Further, zoning needs to look way beyond 14 years.  Third, part of our affordability problem is due precisely to the scarcity of sites zoned high density.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good link Adam!  </p>
<p>The anti-density types do seem pretty clueless in their arguments, and the &#8220;open letter&#8221; does a good job of pointing out many of the holes.  </p>
<p>The zoned capacity claim ignores the concept that not everyone builds &#8212; in fact, in any relatively short period, most typically don&#8217;t.  Further, zoning needs to look way beyond 14 years.  Third, part of our affordability problem is due precisely to the scarcity of sites zoned high density.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/#comment-109</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 07:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.djc.com/blogs/SeattleScape/2008/05/19/is-seattle-overdoing-it-with-density-plans/#comment-109</guid>
		<description>You might be interested in this. 

http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/18/an-open-letter-to-the-livable-seattle-movement/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You might be interested in this. </p>
<p><a href="http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/18/an-open-letter-to-the-livable-seattle-movement/" rel="nofollow">http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/05/18/an-open-letter-to-the-livable-seattle-movement/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
