<?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>Sightline InstituteA Greener City With Less Red Tape - Sightline Institute</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.sightline.org/2007/01/03/a-greener-city-with-less-red-tape/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.sightline.org/2007/01/03/a-greener-city-with-less-red-tape/</link>
	<description>News and Views for a Sustainable Northwest</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 15:54:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>daily</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3</generator>
	
		<item>
		<title>A Greener City With Less Red Tape</title>
		<link><![CDATA[https://www.sightline.org/2007/01/03/a-greener-city-with-less-red-tape/]]></link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2007 21:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[Are Seattle's green developer rules counterproductive? | Here&#8217;s a potentially good idea about which I&#8217;m rather ambivalent: rules requiring in-city developers to include robust landscaping features such as green roofs and vegetation-covered walls. It&#8217;s easy on the eyes, but it may not be smart public policy. To begin with, it&#8217;s unclear how much burden Seattle&#8217;s cutting-edge new rules would impose; and it&#8217;s unclear how much benefit they&#8217;d achieve. But if most developers are skeptical&#8212;and they are, at...]]></description>
					</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
