<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.fastcompany.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title></title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/member_recent_content/4267</link>
 <description>Member recent activity block for member profile page</description>
 <language>xx</language>
<item>
 <title>Comment on Node  ant</title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/comment/comment-node-ant-296</link>
 <description>Doug,  there was a time when these conversions were legal and recommended by government.  It now appears to have been a short sighted plan.  They are no longer legal, and are being addressed as illegal conversions are discovered.  The prior, legal conversions are enough to choke the city.  Even a single family home with 4 or more drivers and cars is enough to choke the city.</description>
 <node>713997</node>
 <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:40:08 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Dick Nepon</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">713997 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Comment on Node  ant</title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/comment/comment-node-ant-260</link>
 <description>Also not covered, the idea of municipalities using the non-profit car-sharing as a basis for reducing overhead. Sharing vehicles with residents, even if pre-reserving them during the business hours, allows for reducing the cost of owning and maintaining a fleet.  Most municipal fleet vehicles are unused evening and overnite.  This also has the added benefit in inner cities of helping to reduce the parking congestion from conversion of large single family homes into multi-family units.  A twelve foot frontage city home might need four or more parking spaces.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fastcompany.com/comment/comment-node-ant-260&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <node>710002</node>
 <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:40:30 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Dick Nepon</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">710002 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Fast Talk Response - </title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/fast-talk-response/fast-talk-response-522</link>
 <description>Well,(no pun intended) perhaps we should think of the water as belonging to everyone, if not to the municipality that it is drawn from, or the watershed that feeds it. Then the Bottlers would need to pay for the resource that they use and we could use that money to attempt to preserve the watershed, and repair the riparian areas that surround the surface waters, and attempt to insure that there will be water there when we need it in the future.</description>
 <node>709954</node>
 <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:17:50 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Dick Nepon</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">709954 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
