L_RAMEY: 1.6 PART I REVIEW (FEEDBACK)

L_RAMEY: 1.6 PART I REVIEW (FEEDBACK)

The reviewers talked about the quantifiers for eyes on the street and better ways to measure that. This might have to do with hours open…

Read Article →
Review feed back_Martselina

Review feed back_Martselina

Read Article →
T_Cockcroft: 1.6 Part I Review (Feedback)

T_Cockcroft: 1.6 Part I Review (Feedback)

It was suggested that we do a shade index. This should be done without the trees to see if the buildings are self shading, what…

Read Article →
H_Morrison_ Part 1 Review

H_Morrison_ Part 1 Review

Comments from the reviews: Mary made a good point about us needing to home in on the tree data a little more. As we edit,…

Read Article →
H_GIBSON_1.6_REVIEW

H_GIBSON_1.6_REVIEW

General Comments: Mary recommended to dive deeper into certain tree species that would be beneficial to plant, as well as considering the benefits of clustering…

Read Article →
Part I Review

Part I Review

Good Job with Part I review. It would be valuable to record, analyze and do some concise revision now.  The comments from Vincent, Mary and…

Read Article →
A_Leider_N_Sjogren_P1_Review

A_Leider_N_Sjogren_P1_Review

Read Article →
L_Ramey and A_Martin 1.6 Part I Review

L_Ramey and A_Martin 1.6 Part I Review

Read Article →
T_COCKCROFT-H_GIBSON-H_MORRISON: 1.6 Part I Review

T_COCKCROFT-H_GIBSON-H_MORRISON: 1.6 Part I Review

Read Article →
Part 1 Review_Martselina

Part 1 Review_Martselina

Read Article →
Skip to toolbar