![[Valid RSS]](images/valid-rss-rogers.png "Valid RSS")
This is a valid RSS feed.
This feed is valid, but interoperability with the widest range of feed readers could be improved by implementing the following recommendations.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" > <channel> <title>Urban Planning Research</title> <atom:link href="http://planning-research.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /> <link>https://planning-research.com</link> <description>essays on urban studies</description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 19:33:11 +0000</lastBuildDate> <language>en-US</language> <sy:updatePeriod> hourly </sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency> 1 </sy:updateFrequency> <generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.1</generator>  <item> <title>The Rise of Co-Living Spaces: Building Community, Brick by Brick (and Beyond!)</title> <link>https://planning-research.com/the-rise-of-co-living-spaces-building-community-brick-by-brick-and-beyond/</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Jorge Matiz]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 19:28:14 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Urban]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://planning-research.com/?p=18</guid> <description><![CDATA[The way we live, you know, how we work, who we connect with – it’s all changing so fast. And our homes? They need to keep up! Remember when a white picket fence was the ultimate goal? Now, people are craving something deeper: A place to belong, a way to...]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way we live, you know, how we work, who we connect with – it’s all changing so fast. And our homes? They need to keep up! Remember when a white picket fence was the ultimate goal? Now, people are craving something deeper: A place to belong, a way to afford city life, and a life where connection trumps loneliness. That’s driving the whole co-living thing, turning shared living on its head and reshaping the housing scene.</p> <p>As an architect and design consultant knee-deep in co-living (it’s basically my jam), I’ve been on the front lines of this. From the first sketches to seeing a community thrive, successes, failures – the whole shebang! I’ve seen how design can spark real connections and tackle some gnarly problems like feeling isolated and not being able to find somewhere affordable to live. Let’s get into how architecture really impacts the heart of community living.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">What is Co-Living, Anyway? And Why the Hype?</h2> <p>So, co-living. What is it? It’s way more than just having roommates like in the sitcoms, it’s about thoughtfully designed housing that mixes private spaces with awesome shared stuff, all centered around community. Unlike crashing with random people who signed the lease because they had to, co-living is a conscious choice, driven by wanting to connect and share experiences for authentic relationships. It’s intentionality meets architecture.</p> <p>The co-living trend has just exploded lately. That’s because there is a shift in people’s priorities. There is, first off, the fact that decent housing in big cities is a nightmare to afford, especially if you’re a millennial or Gen Z. Co-living is an easier way to get your foot in the door. But also there is loneliness that co-living helps solve. Co-living comes with built-in friends, tackling feelings of being alone.</p> <p>If you ask me, co-living is all about that deep human need to belong. People want genuine connections and a sense of purpose, and co-living is designed for that. It’s about creating spaces where bumping into someone and striking up a convo just happens, where you feel supported and understood. Like the last project I did – we put in this huge communal dining area and a shared workshop. Those spots became magnets, people cooking and eating together, working on crazy projects. Those little spaces were people’s biggest thing.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">The Key Architectural Principles of Co-Living Design</h2> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> Making it Happen: Intentional Common Areas</h3> <p>The heart of good co-living design is all about those deliberate shared spaces. We’re talking kitchens, living rooms, co-working spots, gyms – the places where people come together to do life together. The design of these spots has to be cozy, useful, and super welcoming. Natural light is huge, it’s proven that it lifts moods and makes you more productive. Comfy furniture that invites conversation is also key. So too is flexible space whether it be through furniture or work space, which allows for different preference from all users.</p> <p>I remember on the project from before, the kitchen was closed off and standard before. I changed it as an open and accessible kitchen for everyone to use. Residents all came together and started to cook and share. The whole change came from a simply redesign.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> Find Your Nook: Third Spaces</h3> <p>Beyond the big common spots, third spaces are critical in co-living. These are spots that aren’t totally private (like your bedroom) but aren’t totally public either (like the main living room). Think balconies, courtyards, rooftop decks, or just little spots to chill. These are your escapes when you need a break from the action, but you’re not quite ready to hide away in your room. Users can feel included while still feeling like they are on their own.</p> <p>I have learned that indoor/outdoor elements can foster better third spaces. Bifold doors can easily be added to open dining areas. this can make it feel less isolated, and easier to come together as a shared unit.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> Getting Around: Circulation and Connectivity</h3> <p>How people move through a co-living space – the flow – really affects how they interact. Hallways shouldn’t just be hallways; they should be chances to connect also through architectural details. Where you put stairwells and common areas can lead to spontaneous chats and run-ins. Rather than hiding the stairwell in the back, make it impossible to miss near the entrance. People will ditch the elevator if you give them a good reason, increasing the chances of a quick hello. Or try this: a little seating area near the mailboxes. Instant gathering spot!</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Privacy Please! Balancing Privacy and Community: A Delicate Dance</h2> <p>The biggest myth about co-living is that you trade your privacy for community. Nope! Good co-living respects the need for both. Building a co-living community is like leading your own life. You should enjoy your time but be open to creating an experience. You need both your own space, and feel supported by that collective. Think about some quiet time for all users.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> Shutting Out the Noise: Designing for Acoustic Privacy</h3> <p>Noise drives people nuts in shared living, co-living included. Designing for peace and quiet is not optional. Don’t just slap up some extra thick walls, consider sounds dampeners in the room. Where you put rooms matters, too. Don’t put bedrooms right next to the kitchen! Put hallways or bathrooms in between.</p> <p>Use sound-absorbing stuff like panels, carpets, and hefty curtains to cut down on noise big time. On one job site, prefabricated walls did exactly that. Keep soundproofing at the forefront for users to better enjoy.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> Make it Yours: Personalization and Customization</h3> <p>Here’s another key to making privacy and community work- let people customize. Let them make their space their own. This gives them a sense of control and makes them feel comfortable. Co-living spots often come furnished, but let people bring their own stuff, too. Turn it into their sanctuary.</p> <p>I’ve been a part of seeing modular furniture systems which were helpful for users needing flexibility for rooms and needs. People feel as though they are more part of the group by creating their own space.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">More Than Just Bricks: Community Programming: Activating Co-Living Spaces</h2> <p>The architecture is the bones of a community, but the programming is what makes it live. A great space is only as good as the people in it. Programming means setting up activities and events the help foster connection and belonging. It’s about more than just sharing a building. To forge new connections and relationships it is necessary to get people involved and happy.</p> <p>Good programming is diverse and meets different needs. Potlucks and movie nights? Workshops where people share skills? Volunteering? All good. The point is to help people connect over their passions for their overall wellness.</p> <p>Programming improves the user experience through a better experience that lasts for some time. By doing this the co-living space is more than a place to live and become a special place for it’s users.</p> <figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" width="536" height="354" src="https://planning-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Coliving2.png" alt="" class="wp-image-19" srcset="https://planning-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Coliving2.png 536w, https://planning-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Coliving2-300x198.png 300w, https://planning-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Coliving2-350x230.png 350w" sizes="(max-width: 536px) 100vw, 536px" /></figure> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Co-Living Design in Practice: Case Studies & Examples</h2> <p>Let’s see this stuff in action! Here are some real co-living projects that nailed the design principles we’ve been talking about for overall quality.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading">Case Study 1: The Collective Old Oak, London, UK (Designed by PLP Architecture)</h3> <p>The Collective Old Oak is one of the biggest co-living setups period where you can have a lot of different types of rooms, common areas, and community activities. From kitchens to dining areas and rooftop terraces users can have what their heart desires. Programming is something the establishment is involved and that is shown to the patrons. Privacy is a key metric for patrons as well. All together it is very ambitious.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading">Case Study 2: Treehouse, Los Angeles, USA (Designed by Lehrer Architects)</h3> <p>Treehouse offers co-living while emphasizing community and social impact. The area is for gathering and creating a community around the property and is very sustainable to make sure they leave any environmental footsteps.</p> <p>Note: I think images of these would definitely sell a great story!</p> <p>Making it Work: Overcoming Challenges and Future Trends in Co-Living Design</p> <p>Like anything new, co-living isn’t perfect. But by being proactive, we can make these communities more inclusive and sustainable. Also, knowing where the co-living trend is headed helps us design for the future.</p> <p>A challenge that can occur is conflict between different residents, which can be inevitable at times. Making things more friendly or designing some features in a space such as soundproofing can help a ton with certain situations. Promoting a diverse amount of events and spaces help reduce friction.</p> <p>It is important for establishments to welcome a number of people with different backgrounds, ages, and abilities. Accessible bathrooms an elevators are something key to consider. Holding events that cater and are more personal with patrons is a great idea as well.</p> <p>I see sustainability something more developed in the designs down the road with renewable energy sources. Incorporating smart home techonology can make managing the home that much easier and gives you peace of mind through security systems. Combine that with innovative technology and create unique living experiences.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Conclusion</h2> <p>Co-living is a shift of mindset. Less loneliness and a move more into connection. Good architecture increases good co-living. These promote feelings of having purpose which extends to a more complete life. These are more than just apartments that make you happier.</p> <p>I invite you to check out great co-living ideas today. If you are wanting great expertise reach out about how to design well. By managing and knowing what should take place in a living design has the potential to benefit and build communities on a different scale.</p>]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title>The Impact of Zoning Laws on Architectural Innovation</title> <link>https://planning-research.com/the-impact-of-zoning-laws-on-architectural-innovation/</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Jorge Matiz]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 19:20:51 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Urban]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://planning-research.com/?p=14</guid> <description><![CDATA[I still remember pitching my ambitious design for a community center – a building designed to practically breathe with passive solar heating and a clever rainwater harvesting system. The planning board’s reaction? Let’s just say it wasn’t exactly a standing ovation. I was met with this wall of non-compliant issues:...]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I still remember pitching my ambitious design for a community center – a building designed to practically breathe with passive solar heating and a clever rainwater harvesting system. The planning board’s reaction? Let’s just say it wasn’t exactly a standing ovation. I was met with this wall of non-compliant issues: height restrictions, landscaping requirements… it felt like every element was under scrutiny. And that was my rude awakening to the often-challenging, yet fascinating, world of zoning regulations and their effect on architectural creativity.</p> <p>For many architects, zoning regulations are just a necessary evil – a rigid framework designed to maintain order, protect residents’ quality of life, and uphold neighborhood character. But what if we challenged that perspective? Even though they can feel like creativity killers, I’d argue that land use regulations, local ordinances and building codes can be a catalyst for inspiration. The limitations they impose can push those of us in architecture to think innovatively, to unearth ingenious solutions, and to design buildings that are not only beautiful and functional, but also deeply respectful of their environment. Let’s explore how architects, community planning, and sustainable design can align within these frameworks.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading"> Zoning Laws: The Unsung Architects of Our Cities</h2> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> a. What are Zoning Laws?</h3> <p>Think of zoning laws as the quiet orchestrators of our urban environments – a set of guidelines established by your local municipalities and government that determine how land can be utilized and developed. They’re essentially the rulebook, shaping our environment long before the first shovel hits the dirt. You’ll usually find these specific regulations meticulously described in municipal codes. Their ultimate goal? To guide land use in a manner that benefits the entire community by ensuring public safety, promoting general welfare, and guiding future development. It’s vital for fostering people’s wellness and shaping our surroundings right from construction’s start.</p> <p>Zoning regulations are meant for the purpose of preventing urban chaos. Imagine factories cropping up next door to schools or massive condominiums blocking sunlight from cozy bungalows. Zoning brings balance, establishing predictability and structure of the communities we share. Zoning laws safeguard property values and neighborhood quality; it is essential to consider their design as a necessity.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> b. Common Types of Zoning Regulations</h3> <p>To understand zoning districts, visualize a land use map divided into designated categories. The specifics can vary significantly from city to city, and even neighborhood to neighborhood, but here are some common zoning classifications and how they affect the design process, in particular:</p> <ul class="wp-block-list"><li>Residential: Primarily for housing; that being said, varying densities are often permitted. Expect strict guidelines governing minimum lot sizes, setback distances, and height restrictions – think minimum lot widths or limitations on units per acre. This will drastically shape the look and feel of residential neighborhoods.</li> <li>Commercial: Intended for business and all retail activity. Regulations often address signage, hours of operation, and permissible noise levels – even the size and location of a logo might be controlled. The main goal is to create a safe environment for commercial development.</li> <li>Industrial: Designated for manufacturing, warehousing, and other intense activities. Zoning in these areas focuses heavily on environmental protection and minimizing disruption to residential areas, including controls on pollution and truck traffic.</li> <li>Mixed-Use: Combining residential and commercial elements thoughtfully. These zones aim to foster vibrant, walkable communities. However, they come with zoning restrictions on parking, density, and architectural design.</li></ul> <p>Beyond these general categories, you’ll encounter specific restrictions like building height limitations, parking space requirements, and minimum setback distances from property lines. Knowing these rules early on is critical when evaluating development possibilities.</p> <figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img decoding="async" width="567" height="412" src="https://planning-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/zoning-regulation.png" alt="Zoning regulation" class="wp-image-15" srcset="https://planning-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/zoning-regulation.png 567w, https://planning-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/zoning-regulation-300x218.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 567px) 100vw, 567px" /></figure> <h2 class="wp-block-heading"> How Zoning Laws Can Stifle Architectural Innovation</h2> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> a. The Limitations of Prescriptive Zoning</h3> <p>The biggest hurdle, in my experience, is prescriptive zoning. Often, these regulations are so painstakingly specific, so inflexible, that they unintentionally suppress architectural originality. They dictate not just what can be built, but often how, often restricting material choices and aesthetic elements. The final result? A bland urban landscape, lacking unique personality.</p> <p>For instance, a historic district zoning law might prescribe a specific roof pitch, siding material, and window style. While preserving a charming district is admirable, this can completely shut down opportunities for incorporating contemporary design elements or sustainable techniques. It’s about community enhancement efforts and what a zoning professional looks for in a design.</p> <p>I learned this firsthand when I had to sacrifice energy efficiency and design for the sake of an extended library. I envisioned a design that utilized glass, and yet I used brick because it was “acceptable” for building materials.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> b. Increased Costs and Project Delays</h3> <p>Zoning regulations can significantly increase a project’s timeline and expenses. Obtaining approvals can also feel like navigating the minotaur’s labyrinth. Should a design vary from the code, you may have to seek to obtain money for the work.</p> <p>A project was delayed a year for being above the limit. The delay caused the project to frustrate investors, and some studies show that zoning issues add percentages to the project’s cost.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading"> Case Studies: Architectural Triumphs Within Zoning Constraints</h2> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> a. Example 1: The Willow Creek Co-Housing Project, Asheville, NC</h3> <p>The Willow Creek Co Housing project is a great case for me, located in Asheville, North Carolina. We envisioned sustainability in a living space and the initial restrictions seemed unachievable. The original plan was denied. They helped to minimize their effect in the building materials. It strengthens the community and overcomes restrictions, and helps the overall design.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> b. Example 2: The Ironworks District Adaptive Reuse, Beloit, WI</h3> <p>Revitalizing the ironworks in Beloit, Wisconsin tested my ingenuity. The wasteland had warehouses and factories. This industrially-zoned area consisted of public areas, apartments, and office spaces.</p> <p>We discussed the concerns with members of the community, along with officials. After leveraging density bonus programs, green roofs, and solar panels, we ultimately gained building density.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> c. Analysis of Successful Strategies</h3> <p>There are two themes present that show the zoning guidelines, people communicating with the community, and architects embracing creativity. Zoning regulation doesn’t have to feel like roadblocks.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading"> Zoning Laws as a Catalyst for Creative Solutions</h2> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> a. Embracing Constraints as Opportunities</h3> <p>Restrictions will give room to sharpen design. I needed to design a building from the ground up, I had to start with a building that was not there, and had height limitations.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> b. Thinking Outside the Box: Innovative Design Approaches</h3> <p>To improve zoning you need to think outside of the box.</p> <p> Modular Construction</p> <p> Green Roofs</p> <p> Adaptable Space</p> <p> Smart Technology</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading"> Proactive Engagement: Influencing Zoning for Innovation</h2> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> a. Understanding the Local Zoning Landscape</h3> <p>Explore the online zoning and municipal codes. Contact to clarify the ambiguous information.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> b. Building Relationships with Zoning Boards</h3> <p>Transparency and decision-making go a long way, so show innovation. Address questions that they ask to find a common ground.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> c. Advocating for Zoning Reform</h3> <p>Engage in meetings so people will feel understood, listen to them, and show supportive development and sustainable solutions.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading"> The Future of Zoning and Architecture</h2> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> a. Emerging Trends in Zoning</h3> <p>You need to prioritize sustainability, community vibrancy, and flexibility for urban areas.</p> <p> Form-based Codes</p> <p> Mixed-use Zoning</p> <p> Transit-Oriented Development</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> b. The Role of Technology</h3> <p>BIM is a powerful tool for technology. You are to meet the building regulations with AI and it will save time.</p> <h3 class="wp-block-heading"> c. The Importance of Adaptability</h3> <p>You need innovative ideas with technology, because these are collaborative ideas.</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading"> Conclusion</h2> <p>Zoning regulations can be a point of make-or-break. Take the insights to build a strong addition to the community.</p> <p>With a healthy dose of community and ideas, we all demonstrate positive and great transformations for what makes great designs.</p>]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title>Cars, Parking and Planetizen: A Mess of Externalities</title> <link>https://planning-research.com/cars-parking-and-planetizen-a-mess-of-externalities/</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Randall Crane]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 18:41:06 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Urban]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://planning-research.com/?p=7</guid> <description><![CDATA[Planetizen has two early July 2010 essays and two comments on road and parking externalities and subsidies that are as good examples as any of (a) how fundamental the concepts of externality and subsidies are to evaluating public policy and (b) how hard they are to explain, or even understand....]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Planetizen has two early July 2010 essays and two comments on road and parking externalities and subsidies that are as good examples as any of (a) how fundamental the concepts of externality and subsidies are to evaluating public policy and (b) how hard they are to explain, or even understand.</p><p>Planetizen blogger and Law Professor Michael Lewyn goes first by arguing that a minimum parking requirement is a harmful externality, which at the end of the day worsens congestion, pollution and public health. That he mistakes a distortionary rule for an externality is confusing (there is probably a social cost to the rule but it is not an externality in his example), yet he makes the useful point that even well-meaning regulations can be bad. His more serious fault is clarifying neither how nor when. Is any parking regulation a net social burden or only 1.75 spaces per Jacksonville, Florida apartment? One can be excused for hoping that some regulations, even of parking, are beneficial on net, but his essay won’t help you figure out which, or by how much.</p><p>A few days later, Planetizen blogger and Reason Foundation Director Sam Staley argued that road taxes (and by extension public regulations) are not external costs because they are not, by the rules of democracy, involuntary. In a comment, Todd Litman disagrees, in a way, saying a distortion is a distortion, even if the possibly ignorant majority approves. (He could but does not clarify that one can have distortions that are not externalities.) Roads are not fully financed by user fees, and thus user decisions are distorted in favor of cars. In the next comment, Charles Siegel agrees, further claiming that neither roads nor parking are public goods and thus should not be funded through indirect taxes or regulations as, again, doing so amounts to distortive subsidies.</p><p>Part of the confusion here is because this discussion seamlessly conflates two categories of policy problems: One determining the right amount of a public good, such as of legal rules, and the other how to efficiently pay the bill (where the second is considerably complicated by the first). Litman and Siegel don’t see a distinction as, here anyway, they define roads and parking spaces as purely private, no different than a good meal. Each user uses it all and should pay accordingly. Any deviation from this is both unjustified and has social efficiency consequences (which Lewyn misidentifies as a series of externalities). Staley exaggerates the difference, almost implying they are pure public goods that can only be financed by indirect means subject to majority rule.</p><p>Public regulations have many of the technical properties of public goods, and I very much doubt — though I might well be wrong — that Lewyn, Litman or Siegel feel that either roads or parking should be either fully private or completely unregulated. How much then? I don’t know but either do they or Staley (as that would require the measurement of individual shared benefits at any price point, and then their aggregation, neither of which are observable). How, then, to pay? Like every dime-store economist, Staley included, I agree users should fully pay when the private benefits of use are easy to measure (unless the goods or rules have equity goals). In many cases, that applies to roads and parking. But roads and parking also have public regulatory and investment components, and like it or not the implications for how much and how to pay then get messy.</p><p>Put another way, although it advertises otherwise, this Planetizen debate of how to pay for roads or parking has almost nothing to do with externalities as defined by wikipedia (or Pigou)**. It is almost all about when subsidies are justified or, more to the point, when car use should be discouraged.</p><p>Some of these participants feel roads and parking are unduly subsidized, which is to say subsidized at all. Litman has literally written an encyclopedia trying to nail this down, to society’s great external benefit, but he has yet to convince the majority to fund the system entirely via user fees, if that is indeed what he recommends. Staley seems more satisfied with the status quo — but in guessing that, I digress. All I should conclude is that we ultimately have no clear means to determine which side is more right outside the great imperfections of the political process.</p><p>p.s. After I wrote this post but before I got around to publishing it, because I more or less had stopped using this blog to think out loud, there were a dozen or more extensive comments on the Staley entry. Some concerned definitional issues and many staked out normative turf. It’s an interesting example of the ways in which reasonable people disagree on normative grounds about what are essentially positive questions.</p><p>*Since when are parking or road use unobservable? I’m only referring to the public goods part of each here, which include option values, congestion burdens, and the like. Read Shoup (2005), The High Cost of Free Parking, APA. And if he left it out or you just want another example of very clear thinking with many fewer words, but which just same concludes that public goods are harder to provide and fund than one would hope, and you haven’t yet, read Samuelson (1954), “The Theory of Pure Public Goods,” The Review of Economics and Statistics.</p><p>Of course, traffic-related congestion and pollution are classic externalities, which I’m ignoring for space. If you think even just the first part of that isn’t tricky to price, see Diamond (1973), “Consumption Externalities and Imperfect Corrective Pricing,” Bell Journal of Economics.</p><p>If you’re done reading those, a much longer take on all this is Crane (2006), “<a href="https://www.lincolninst.edu/subcenters/teaching-fiscal-dimensions-of-planning/materials/crane-concepts.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Public finance concepts for planners</a>.” I’m revising this for a book on infrastructure planning, and will update this then.</p>]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel></rss> If you would like to create a banner that links to this page (i.e. this validation result), do the following:
Download the "valid RSS" banner.
Upload the image to your own server. (This step is important. Please do not link directly to the image on this server.)
Add this HTML to your page (change the image src attribute if necessary):
If you would like to create a text link instead, here is the URL you can use:
http://www.feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http%3A//planning-research.com/feed/
