At 40-80 families per acre, the same geometry gives larger gardens, and there is no need for underground parking.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• In conventional high-rise housing at 200/ha, not one family has their own garden; in Shiratori every family does.claim0.783
  Comparative claim about equitable access to private outdoor space.
• Table 4: At 20 units/acre: Pedestrians drop to 7%, Gardens 33%, Buildings 32%, Cars 28%finding0.782
  Demonstrates how a 12% density increase (from 16 to 20 units/acre) causes dramatic pedestrian space loss.
• 86% of 100 surveyed families desired a private garden, even a tiny onefinding0.781
  Answer to Question 1 of the 11-question survey.
• It is possible to provide a high-density living environment with these qualities while housing 80 families per acre.claim0.780
  Central feasibility claim of the chapter.
• A density of 16 dwellings (or units) per acre is roughly the upper limit of what can be achieved while keeping the environment humane.claim0.758
  The central density threshold claim derived from the interaction of the four colors.
• Table 3: Progresso percentages at 16 units/acre: Pedestrians 17%, Gardens 30%, Buildings 28%, Cars 25%finding0.748
  Specific target percentages for the Progresso neighborhood at the upper limit of humane density.
• To make each garden a center and each house a center, lots must be composed of two sub-centers (house area + garden area), producing irregular zig-zag lots — not simple rectangles as in conventional subdivisionsclaim0.744
  Alexander's claim that center-generating requirements force unconventional lot geometry.
• Top 8 rated housing desires by 100 families: (1) private garden, (2) low-rise, (3) user design, (4) low-traffic street, (5) more sunshine, (6) park near house, (7) direct entrance, (8) nearby small shopsfinding0.742
  Independent rating by families of what they want most.