<?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: Not Easy Being A Developer Around Here – And It’s About To Get Worse</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/blogs/dealsdevelopments/2009/10/14/not-easy-being-a-developer-around-here-%e2%80%93-and-it%e2%80%99s-about-to-get-worse/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/blogs/dealsdevelopments/2009/10/14/not-easy-being-a-developer-around-here-%e2%80%93-and-it%e2%80%99s-about-to-get-worse/</link>
	<description>Just another Warren Group Blogs weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 04:41:46 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: belg4mit</title>
		<link>http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/blogs/dealsdevelopments/2009/10/14/not-easy-being-a-developer-around-here-%e2%80%93-and-it%e2%80%99s-about-to-get-worse/#comment-666</link>
		<dc:creator>belg4mit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bankerandtradesman.com/blogs/dealsdevelopments/?p=390#comment-666</guid>
		<description>Welcome, you're a little late to the party. The stretch code is not nearly as calamitous as you make it out to be. A) Communities have the choice of opting-in B) It allows for a more explicitly codified set of requirements, rather than random restrictions applied through special permitting C) It's not that different from Boston's Article 37, which has not killed construction on the other side of the river. 

Rather than bemoan communities' attempts to address the problems facing us, why not look at the positive effects of such efforts? That $8,000 doesn't disappear into the ether, rather it goes towards materials and quality work, a boon to the economy you worship. Furthermore, that initial investment can easily be regained through lower utility bills. Money which is not redirected elsewhere for fossil fuels, but will remain in local pockets until it is spent on other goods and services. Will homeowners necessarily understand this? Perhaps not at first, but consider that another differentiating factor with which the invisible hand may optimize the market: those builders best able to convey the utility of an efficient home will succeed, and those which cannot won't.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Welcome, you&#8217;re a little late to the party. The stretch code is not nearly as calamitous as you make it out to be. A) Communities have the choice of opting-in B) It allows for a more explicitly codified set of requirements, rather than random restrictions applied through special permitting C) It&#8217;s not that different from Boston&#8217;s Article 37, which has not killed construction on the other side of the river. </p>
<p>Rather than bemoan communities&#8217; attempts to address the problems facing us, why not look at the positive effects of such efforts? That $8,000 doesn&#8217;t disappear into the ether, rather it goes towards materials and quality work, a boon to the economy you worship. Furthermore, that initial investment can easily be regained through lower utility bills. Money which is not redirected elsewhere for fossil fuels, but will remain in local pockets until it is spent on other goods and services. Will homeowners necessarily understand this? Perhaps not at first, but consider that another differentiating factor with which the invisible hand may optimize the market: those builders best able to convey the utility of an efficient home will succeed, and those which cannot won&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

