sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ecovillage, Green development, Intentional living, Local food, Sustainable urbanism

Enhancing at the Level: Lessons from American

A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science in

in the School of Architecture and Interior Design of the Design, Arts, Architecture, and Planning

by Leila B Loezer University of Cincinnati June 2011

Committee: Virginia Russell, FASLA, RLA, MLA, LEED AP, GRP (Chair) Carla Chifos, AICP (Faculty Member) Robert Thayer, FASLA, FCELA (Reader)

Abstract

Sustainability has been a subject of concern in various levels of society. Top-down approaches proposed by governments, corporations, and non-profit organizations are responsible for implementing policies, marketing, and organized movements towards environmentally friendly practices and design. Grassroots initiatives can also contribute with experiences and encourage local communities to develop and implement strategies to enhance sustainability.

Many times, overlooks the unusual and rich achievements of intentional urban communities and EcoVillages. Some of the most successful examples of urban design are the result of grassroots initiatives, which many times did not engage the professional services of architects and designers. This thesis explores best practices and experiences of grassroots initiatives to make the urban environment more sustainable. The literature review chapter identifies the most relevant strategies for sustainable communities. Strategies and objectives are divided into social, environmental, and economic approaches and then detailed in a matrix. The objectives in the matrix of sustainable measures are used as criteria to compare the four communities studied: Village Homes, at Ithaca, Los Angeles EcoVillage, and Enright

Ridge EcoVillage. This thesis proposes recommendations of best practices for communities that are striving to become more sustainable based on the experiences of the communities studied.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis ii

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis iii

Acknowledgements

This thesis would not be possible without the support and contributions of my advisors,

Professors Virginia Russell and Carla Chifos, who provided guidance for literature and case studies suggestions, instigated discussions about the research topics, and made relevant comments on my writings. The contribution of my reader, Professor Robert Thayer, was absolutely essential for the improvement of the structure of this thesis. I also appreciate his suggestions of literature and insights on the discussion about sustainable communities. Thanks to all my committee members.

This thesis would not be complete without visits to the communities described in the case studies chapter. Professor Robert Thayer and his wife, Lacey, warmly received me in Village

Homes and gave me an insider‘s point of view on the community. Courtney Schroeder allowed me to stay at her house during my visit to the EcoVillage at Ithaca. Liz Walker and other residents from the EcoVillage at Ithaca dedicated time to talk about what it is like to live in the community. Lois Arkin provided me with information about the Los Angeles EcoVillage over the phone and helped arrange my visit to the community. Julio Santizo gave me a detailed tour through the Los Angeles EcoVillage and was prompt to answer all my questions. Jim Schenk dedicated plenty of time in explaining and discussing the process of creation of the Enright

Ridge EcoVillage and its functioning. Thank you to all community coordinators and residents who supported my visits and spared time to talk about the EcoVillages.

The opportunity to use the theoretical and practical aspects of this research in teaching a course was an experience of major significance. Thank you Professor Frank Russell for

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis iv

providing me with the opportunity to apply my research in his Sustainable Seminar in the Spring of 2011 in the form of lectures and case studies exercises.

Finally, this thesis would not be possible without the help of Anne Sawyer, Professor

Frank Russell, and Glen-Erik Cortes, who thoughtfully revised my writings and provided suggestions for improvement. Thank you to friends and family members for all your support.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis v

Table of Contents

Chapter I: Introduction ...... 1 Definition of Community ...... 3 Definition of Sustainable ...... 3 Sustainable Communities ...... 6 The ...... 8 Intentional Communities and EcoVillages ...... 12 Problem Statement ...... 16 Goals and Objectives of the Study ...... 17 Research Questions ...... 18 Methodology ...... 18

Chapter II: Literature Review ...... 22 What makes a community sustainable? ...... 23 Social-oriented strategies ...... 24 Environmental-oriented strategies ...... 30 Economic-oriented strategies ...... 38 Summary and criteria for case study analysis ...... 43 Comprehensive Theoretical Frameworks for Sustainable Communities ...... 46 Precepts of Biological Design ...... 47 Ecological Design...... 48

Chapter III: Case Studies ...... 52 Village Homes, Davis, California ...... 53 Urban design ...... 54 Solar design ...... 56 Low impact site infrastructure: natural drainage system ...... 58 Community living ...... 59 Summary ...... 61 EcoVillage at Ithaca, Ithaca, NY ...... 64 Land use ...... 66 model and ...... 68

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis vi

Community living ...... 73 Education and outreach ...... 75 Summary ...... 76 Los Angeles Eco-Village, Los Angeles, California ...... 78 Restoring the urban environment ...... 80 Environmentally oriented activities ...... 82 Education and outreach ...... 84 Community living ...... 84 Summary ...... 86 Enright Ridge Eco-village, Cincinnati, Ohio ...... 88 Envisioning and creation process ...... 89 Restoring the urban environment ...... 94 Environment and education ...... 96 Community living ...... 98 Summary ...... 99 Comparative Matrix ...... 101 Overall observations ...... 104 Social dimension ...... 104 Environmental dimension ...... 105 Economic dimension ...... 106

Chapter IV: Recommendations ...... 108 Limitations of EcoVillages as a model for other communities ...... 110 Limitations of this study and recommendations for future study ...... 111 The need for a paradigm shift ...... 111

Bibliography ...... 118

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis vii

List of Tables and Figures

Figure 1 Graphical representations of the term sustainability ...... 5

Figure 2 - Scenes of a London district and a street depicted in 1872 by Gustave Dupre. (Benevolo 1980) ...... 10

Figure 3 - The village of Harmony, designed by Robert Owen in 1825. (Benevolo 1980) ...... 11

Figure 4 - The 15 elements of EcoVillages (Jackson and Svensson 2002) ...... 14

Figure 5 - Village Homes is located one mile away from the University of California Davis and two miles from Davis ...... 54

Figure 6 - The streets of Village Homes (left) are narrower than streets in other subdivisions. The area saved from narrow streets was destined to common spaces for residents...... 56

Figure 7 - The streets at Village Homes are oriented east-west, allowing every house to have a façade oriented to south and receive intense solar radiation in the winter...... 57

Figure 8 - Diagram illustrating the functioning of the natural drainage system in Village Homes ...... 58

Figure 9 - The common backyard spaces shared by groups of eight houses comprise a natural stormwater management system composed of creeks and ponds...... 59

Figure 10 - Village Homes community facilities and open spaces...... 61

Figure 11 - Village Homes residents gather at Parque Chico after a weekly happy hour...... 63

Figure 12 - The EcoVillage at Ithaca is located about 1.5 miles of the of Ithaca, NY...... 66

Figure 13 - EcoVillage at Ithaca Envisioning Plan ...... 67

Figure 14 – West Haven Farm and CSA share pick-up...... 68

Figure 15 - Pedestrian path at the FROG neighborhood...... 69

Figure 16 - The EVI current configuration with FROG on the right and SONG on the left of the picture...... 70

Figure 17 - Co-housing plan for FROG neighborhood and current aspect ...... 71

Figure 18 - Overview of the SONG neighborhood ...... 72

Figure 19 - Master Plan of TREE neighborhood...... 73

Figure 20 - Shared meals at the Common House and a community celebration...... 74

Figure 21 - The Los Angeles EcoVillage is located west of downtown Los Angeles in a densely urbanized area...... 78

Figure 22 - The boundaries of the Los Angeles EcoVillage. The two buildings owned by the CRSP are highlighted. .... 79

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis viii

Figure 23 - Water reuse system in the ecovillage apartments. Used water from the washing machine can be flushed into the community gardens through a system of pipes. Residents use biodegradable laundry detergents...... 81

Figure 24 – Composting pit and community garden in the courtyard of the main building...... 82

Figure 25 - The room where the Bicycle Kitchen used to be is now used by residents to store their bicycles...... 83

Figure 26 - LAEV is full with public art works...... 85

Figure 27 - Location of the Enright Ridge EcoVillage ...... 88

Figure 28 - Location of the Seminary Square Eco-village in East Price Hill and the proposed location of open spaces and walking trail...... 90

Figure 29 - Proposal for the revitalization of the business district at the Warsaw Avenue...... 91

Figure 30 - The area highlighted represents the properties that are part of the Enright Ridge EcoVillage. Imago for the

Earth owns approximately 35 acres of land, most of which are natural preserves...... 92

Figure 31 - The greenhouse used by the CSA and one of the community gardens...... 97

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis ix

Chapter I: Introduction

EcoVillages are alternative models of communities that strive to be sustainable in the social, environmental, and economic senses. The experiences and best practices of American

EcoVillages can serve as examples for groups of people that intend to be sustainable. This thesis will demonstrate how select communities have become more sustainable providing best practice alternatives for communities attempting to enhance sustainability.

The sustainability discourse has become remarkably popular in the last two decades. The awareness of the negative impact human activities may have on the environment, and the projections regarding the fact that depletion of natural resources and will undermine the quality of life of future generations, have mobilized diverse spheres of society for immediate action. In response to these concerns, Federal and State Governments have adopted laws and policies to protect natural resources and to improve environmental quality. At the same time, local governments encourage their residents through monetary incentives or user fees to save water, reduce and recycle waste, and to use alternative means of transportation.

Non-governmental organizations also play an important role in the scenario of environmental awareness; the Leadership in Energy and (LEED), for example, establishes benchmarks to measure energy efficiency of buildings and neighborhood developments, and is nowadays widely applied in the architecture and planning fields. National urban design movements like and Smart Growth are supported by architects and planners as alternatives to make American more efficient and sustainable. Corporations have also found that increasing efficiency reduces costs and therefore increases profit. Moreover,

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 1

the buzzword ―green‖, which ultimately implies sustainability, can be an effective marketing tool nowadays.

However, several authors and theorists in the fields of architecture and planning have pointed out that the widespread understanding of sustainability is often shallow and limited

(Williamson, Radford, and Bennetts 2003; Naess 1994; Naess 1994; McLaughlin 1994; Capra

1994; Capra 1994; Todd and Todd 1994). These and other authors argue that a paradigm shift in is necessary in order to become sustainable. True sustainability is founded in fair economic and social relationships that coexist in harmony with the natural environment. It involves sharing and caring for the Earth as well as taking from nature only what can be replaced within its carrying capacity.

It is also necessary to concentrate primarily on the issues of the local community rather than on distant ecological disasters. Several authors share the understanding that bottom-up initiatives and citizen participation at the community level can effectively foster environmental awareness, and a sense of pertaining to the place, as demonstrated by the many intentional communities that have flourished in the United States. Intentional communities are groups of people who believe in an and are willing to establish a lifestyle diverse from the mainstream society and to build their own community separated from the existing mainstream systems. Intentional communities have demonstrated that the engagement of people in collective activities can instill a deep connection to their surroundings.

EcoVillages are intentional communities which aim to establish a harmonious relationship between humans and nature, with a low environmental impact. The thesis

―Enhancing Sustainability at the Community Level: Lessons from American EcoVillages‖ analyzes the structure and achievements of selected communities that have reduced their impact

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 2

in the natural environment and at the same time enhanced social relations and life standards.

These communities focus on engaging people in environmental restoration, social activities, and the decision making process to solve local issues.

Definition of Community

In a biological sense, a community is a group of animal and plant that occupy a determined area and interact with one another. Geography offers a more comprehensive definition of community: a locality inhabited by a group of people who share common values, a government, and the physical space itself; in this case, the definition is founded on spatiality but involves political and ideological aspects.

The meaning of the term community can also involve different aspects and levels of sharing. A community can be a group of people who identify themselves, or are identified by others, as different from the mainstream society. Therefore, the designation community does not necessarily depend on physical proximity but on common understanding and sharing. The definition of community employed in the present work involves both spatial and social aspects, thus, communities are here considered groups of individuals who share a physical space, interests, values, and cultivate a group identity.

Definition of Sustainable

The word sustainable has various meanings and can be found in various fields of study such as economics, law, archaeology, and even in military sciences. The term sustainability has become popular recently, especially in the last twenty years when it became widely used by ecologists and environmentalists and associated with environmental issues. Sustainability has

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 3

become a buzzword also in the fields of architecture and in the last two decades, but there is controversy and ambiguity about the meanings of the word. It is thus important for the present work to discuss the different approaches to sustainability in the built environment.

The diagrams shown on the next page represent two different approaches to sustainability. The graphic on the left represents the most recurrent representation of what sustainability consists of, as a balance of social, economic, and environmental aspects of a community. The diagram on the right also presents sustainability as a combination of the same three aspects, but establishes a hierarchical order of importance among them. This second representation attributes a higher importance to the natural environment, as society is within it.

The human species and its society are here an element in the planet and depend on its balance to survive. In this second representation, economy is within the human society and, therefore, in a lower hierarchical level than social aspects. This latter graphical representation clearly opposes the central importance given to economic factors in our society. In order to be sustainable humans need to assume their position as another species sharing resources from the natural environment.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 4

Figure 1 Graphical representations of the term sustainability

Venn Diagram representing the three overlapping Alternative representation of the three different spheres of sustainability. This is one of the most popular spheres of sustainability, in hierarchical order of graphical depictions of sustainability. importance. Source: http://www.calacademy.org/teachers/upload/docs/ Source: http://www.sustainablecampus.cornell.edu/csi.cfm sustainability_diagram.jpg

A dictionary definition of sustainability is ―capable of being sustained or continued over the long term, without adverse effects.‖ A definition that explicitly refers to the human intervention in the natural ecosystems presented by the Oxford dictionary: sustainability is ―a system of living that, in the short, medium, and long term, maintains a quality of life for all individuals and sentient species while conserving natural ecosystems, perpetuating and socio-diversity, and supporting environmental integrity.‖ This definition comprehends the three spheres of sustainability by mentioning the need to ensure quality of life, environmental integrity (conservation, preservation of biodiversity), and socio-diversity in order to achieve sustainability.

There are two key concepts that determine whether a system is meant or able to be sustainable: carrying capacity and natural capital. The concept of carrying capacity is derived from biology, more specifically from , and means the capacity of an environment to sustain one or more animal populations. If the carrying capacity of an environment is surpassed the system starts to decline. The concept of natural capital, or natural resources, refers to the

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 5

basic materials used in production and encountered in nature. Resources can be renewable

(water, forests, soil, animals, when used in a manner they can renew themselves and continue to be productive) or non-renewable. The planet‘s carrying capacity is intimately linked with the responsible use of resources and the size.

Beatley argues that the meaning of sustainability is ambiguous and controversial, and instead proposes the understanding of sustainability as a vision, a set of principles that describe the approach taken, rather than a word. A vision must be powerful and compelling at the same time, and capable of being put in practice (Beatley 1998, 356). This approach will be presented in detail in the next chapter.

Sustainable Communities

In the 1990s the concept of sustainability started to be used often in the literature about human settlements. The assumption behind the introduction of terms such as ―sustainable cities,‖

―sustainable urban development,‖ and ―sustainable communities‖ is that the current model of human settlement is not virtually practical in a long term range.

The discussion regarding environmental and social issues started to become popular in the 1980s. (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987) is a benchmark in the sustainability discussion; it summarized the current environmental and social issues and proposed legal principles for environmental protection and , which have been widely discussed during the last 20 years. The report expresses the inherent conflict between human activities and environmental constraints, and its possible long term effects in the planet‘s life. The world in which we live is finite and the patterns of development of the last decades of the 20th century would be impossible to continue without disastrous results

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 6

to the planet and, consequently, to human beings. Sustainable development is set by Our

Common Future as meeting ―the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,‖ a definition that is recurring in the literature on this topic.

Our Common Future stresses that environmental issues are not the only problem to be addressed. The unfair distribution of wealth among people and countries is a distortion that must be resolved if we aim for a sustainable world. Economic growth is seen as fundamental for the diminishing of poverty and inequality, especially in developing countries. Critics to Our

Common Future argue that it has an excessively technological approach to sustainability, i.e., it relies on scientific development to deal with environmental issues and on the continuity of existing structures of power (Van der Ryn and Cowan 2007). Despite its generally technocratic approach, Our Common Future is a worthwhile reference to this thesis since it remarks about the importance of decentralization of funds, political power, and personnel to local authorities, which are more familiar with local needs. The report provides attention to initiatives for strengthening local authorities, self-reliance, and citizen involvement.

A sustainable settlement can be defined as a city or community designed or landscaped in such a way as to ensure the continued conservation of natural resources and the surrounding natural environment while providing the economic base needed to support its inhabitants. This definition considers both environmental and economic factors as equally relevant for establishing a sustainable settlement. The International Union for Conservation of Nature report, Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for , defines sustainable communities as groups that, 1) care for their own environments and do not damage those of others, 2) use resources frugally and sustainably, recycles materials, minimizes wastes and disposes of them safely, 3) conserve life- support systems and the diversity of local ecosystems, and 4) meet their own needs so far as they

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 7

can, but recognize the need to work in partnership with other communities. The vision of these groups is to sustain productive local environments, managing soil, water, and biological diversity for the benefit of local people. ―Conservation action, pollution control, rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems and the improvement of urban environments are all essential elements in a community plan‖ (Munro 1991, 57). This definition implies the economic sphere of sustainability, but only describes directly sustainable communities as those who care for the natural environment.

Rather than a strict definition, Timothy Beatley (1998) presents a synthesis of principles that guide a community toward sustainability. According to him, a community that intends to be sustainable should:

 Minimize exposure of people and property to natural disasters  Recognize fundamental ecological limits and seek to protect and enhance the integrity of ecosystems  Promote a closer connection with, and understanding of, the natural environment  Seek to reduce the of land and resources in fundamental ways  Recognize the interconnectedness of social, economic, and environmental goals  Promote integrative and holistic strategies  Require a new ethical posture  Seek a fair and equitable distribution of resources, opportunities, and environmental risks (Beatley 1998, 356)

The Communes

A is a small group of people who live together and share common interests. A commune can be a group who intends to promote local interests under the subordination of a municipal or state government. However, communes can have different degrees of independence

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 8

from the established political and social systems, holding their own rules of living and/or sharing all property and income. The idea that underpins communes is Utopia, i.e., an imaginary society in which people live close together, cooperate in work and production, and provide support to each other. The cooperation and provision of support eliminates social differences and competition, providing equality to its members (Kanter 1972). The description of the original communes is similar to the definition of currently denominated intentional communities, which are also groups of people who establish their own rules based on commitment instead of obligation. A particular set of values is defined, along with the goals the community intends to achieve, and they serve as a guide for decision-making.

Historically, communes have been established mainly by members of religious sects or separatists from the political system. After the beginning of massive spurred by the

Industrial Revolution, communes started to form as a result of poor living conditions in urban areas. The rural exodus resulting from the Industrial Revolution reshaped and overfilled

European cities in the 1800s without any planning and supporting infrastructure. According to the History of the Cities ―…the streets were too narrow to deal with increased traffic, while the houses were too small and compact to provide accommodation with any degree of comfort for a greatly increased number of inhabitants‖(Benevolo 1980, 753). As a result, slums were formed in peripheral areas. By the middle of the 19th century the overcrowded urban areas, the subhuman living conditions, the unfair wages and work conditions became unbearable, as described by

Engels in The Condition of the Working Class in England (1845).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 9

Figure 2 - Scenes of a London district and a street depicted in 1872 by Gustave Dupre. (Benevolo 1980)

Marxist and socialist principles influenced the 19th century experiments of alternative communities‘ organizations, which were detached physically and politically from the main system. Utopians Fourier and Owen proposed new models of society based on cooperation and community living for groups of about 1,000 to 2,000 people, settled in a village surrounded by agricultural land. These carefully planned villages were meant to form a new society, small enough to be cohesive and large enough to be independent economically and culturally. The movement towards communes and the establishment of intentional communities represented a clear criticism and non-acceptance of mainstream society‘s inequality and its political system‘s unfairness. The idealized communes of the 1800s were ―a direct result of the wave of protest at the intolerable conditions in existing cities,‖ and ―instruments designed to relieve man of the strains imposed by the traditional urban concept, which hindered political change and favored vested interests‖ (Benevolo 1980, 759).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 10

Figure 3 - The village of Harmony, designed by Robert Owen in 1825. (Benevolo 1980)

In the United States the greatest flourishing of communes occurred in the 1840s; a similar but less intense trend occurred in the 1960s and 70s. While the nineteenth century American communes were derived from religious and political disparities with the rest of society, the twentieth century communes mainly criticized social isolation and alienation. These latter communities‘ goals were to promote ―greater intimacy and fuller human development‖ (Kanter

1972, 8). A common ideal found in utopian communities is the ‗return to the land.‘ The contact with the land through agricultural practices is essential to create a sense of place and engagement. The goal of many communities is to ―gain closer contact with nature and the natural order and return to a simpler life more concerned with the fundamentals of existence‖ (Kanter

1972, 53). The ideal of the return to the land and the development of a sense of place are supported by contemporary authors writing about and deep sustainability. The true involvement and value given to the environment are the supporters of a sustainable lifestyle.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 11

Perhaps the most remarkable movement in the 20th century is the

Israeli Kibbutz, which has been guided by religious principles and the spiritual goal of reviving

Judaism and establishing a connection with the Israeli land (Gavron 2000). The Kibbutz movement started in the beginning of the 20th century and acquired substantial economic importance with the massive workforce immigration from Europe after the creation of the state of Israel. Usually rural and based on communal property and responsibility, the Kibbutzim were originally revolutionary societies and changed over time to more traditional ways of life. The traditional principles found in the Kibbutzim are: collective endeavor, communal living, egalitarian principles, pioneering, physical labor, and redemption of the soil. In 2000 there were

267 Kibbutzim in Israel; the number of members varied from 100 to 1,000 residents. There has been an attempt to create urban Kibbutzim (Tamuz) in which the communal life ideal is pursued through democratic participation in decision-making. The Tamuz Kibbutz is based on a small group of people (less than 100 members) who work individually outside the community and pool salaries, own cars collectively, finance education, health, and transportation, support a communal kindergarten, and hold frequent social gatherings.

Intentional Communities and EcoVillages

Intentional Community is nowadays a denomination that includes groups of people who share similar goals and ideals, and intend to experience a determined lifestyle. The Fellowship for Intentional Community defines intentional communities as ―places where idealists have come together to create a better world.‖ Intentional communities include EcoVillages, cohousing communities, residential land trusts, communes, student co-ops, urban housing , , alternative communities, corporate living, and others (Fellowship for

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 12

Intentional Community 2010). The main feature of an intentional community is the cooperation of its members, based on a common vision of how a better life should be. Like communes— which have historically been organized as a form of protest against mainstream society‘s structure—intentional ―community‘s ideals usually arise from something its members see as lacking or missing in the wider culture‖ (Christian 2003, XVI).

EcoVillages are a particular type of intentional community whose goal is to establish a more sustainable lifestyle, in harmony with the natural environment. Ecological intentional communities were fostered by the increasing awareness of negative impacts caused by humans in the natural ecosystems. As a movement, EcoVillages started to organize themselves at the

―EcoVillages and Sustainable Communities‖ conference at Findhorn, in 1995. On this occasion the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) was established as a tool to share ideas and and to promote exchanges to restore the land and to live sustainable lives (GEN 2009). As defined by the GEN, EcoVillages are communities ―who strive to integrate a supportive social environment with a low-impact way of life.‖ Similarly, Hildur Jackson defines EcoVillages as

―communities of people who strive to lead a sustainable lifestyle in harmony with each other, other living beings and the Earth‖ (Jackson and Svensson 2002, 10).

EcoVillages are usually small-scale human settlements, urban or rural, in which all main functions of life are present: manufacture, commerce, provision, social life, and recreation

(Bang 2005). Despite congregating all functions of life in society, EcoVillages do not intend to be isolated or completely independent from the rest of the world. Their goal is to gather people interested in reversing the disintegration of social structures and the destruction of the environment. Other important characteristics of EcoVillages are the incentive to diversify

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 13

people (different backgrounds, occupations, and ages) and the encouragement of participation in decision making.

EcoVillages have three interlinked dimensions: ecology, community, and culture- spirituality. These dimensions are a continuum, as demonstrated in Figure 4:

Figure 4 - The 15 elements of EcoVillages (Jackson and Svensson 2002)

Ecological Dimension

The ecological dimension of EcoVillages consists in the connection between people and the Earth – soil, water, wind, plants, and animals – and the towards its preservation.

Ecology is embedded in the community through models of low-impact living, low-impact building, integrated energy systems, local water treatment, Earth restoration, and .

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 14

The ecological dimension is precisely what differentiates EcoVillages from other kinds of intentional communities. In EcoVillages, the minimization of human impact is the central goal, hence, techniques and experimentation of practices integrated to the natural are conducted extensively.

Social Dimension

The social dimension supported in EcoVillages is mutual with other intentional communities and with the communes of the past. The social character of intentional communities addresses people‘s desire of spending more time together, building relationships, and being part of a supportive environment. In EcoVillages, both individuality and participation in a larger group are valued. The number of people is usually small – 50 to 500 members, according to

Bang (2005) – in order to ensure that every person participates in the decision making in a transparent manner. The guarantee that every member is heard provides residents with a sense of empowerment lacking in mainstream society.

In some EcoVillages education is a major concern and it is addressed through instructional programs, workshops, lectures, and hands-on activities. EcoVillage-type communities often render a supportive and loving environment for children, integrating the young residents into daily tasks in which they can learn various skills. The involvement of the younger generation into activities such as gardening or building balances freedom with the notion of responsibility toward the community space and its members.

The social dimension of EcoVillages also includes the economic factors involved in life in society. People who are interested in joining an EcoVillage are commonly prepared or willing to give up ; the reduced financial costs comprised by living in an EcoVillage allow a shift in lifestyle, in which residents are able to make less money and to spend less money and

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 15

yet maintain or improve their previous quality of life. Several EcoVillages foster the creation of local employment and encourage their residents to live closer to their work places, even if that means having a lower income; the time saved in commuting can be spent with their families, which compensates for monetary diminution. Furthermore, the creation of jobs in the community enhances the multiplier effect and increases the independence—and security—of the community from global systems.

Cultural and Spiritual Dimensions

The cultural and spiritual dimensions are an important part of EcoVillage living.

Residents may search for a reactivation of cultural traditions and for a life in harmony with the

Earth and all living beings. The philosophical approach underlying the vision of many ecovillages is the deep ecology, also known as whole systems approach, which considers humans as just another component of the planet, at the same level of other beings. This approach attributes a profound respect for nature and requires it to be carefully managed in order not to affect the ecosystem‘s balance. ―EcoVillages embody a sense of unity with the natural world‖

(Jackson and Svensson 2002, 12). Nevertheless, many EcoVillages do not emphasize or require spiritual practices from its residents.

Problem Statement

This thesis will compare selected urban EcoVillages with respect to their ability to provide best practices for other communities that intend to become sustainable. As the sustainability discourse becomes increasingly present in our society, local communities are demonstrating the intention of becoming more sustainable. Existing neighborhoods and new

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 16

developments are looking for best practices that address the social, environmental, and economic aspects of sustainability.

The experience of successful1 EcoVillages can be applied or adapted into different contexts, providing groups of people, designers, and governments with ideas on how to make their neighborhoods more sustainable. At the present time, the EcoVillage movement cannot be considered mainstream and there is limited literature about this type of community. This thesis intends to expand the knowledge on EcoVillages and contribute to the study of grassroots initiatives for .

Goals and Objectives of the Study

The goal of this study is to establish a comparison among some of the most well-known

American EcoVillages and to evaluate their visions and practices that are responsible for increased levels of sustainability. The objective is to create a matrix of practices and alternatives of these communities that can work as an easily readable and accessible guide for citizen groups and designers who are willing to enhance the sustainability of their communities or to design a . By analyzing the recurrence of certain alternatives and concentration areas, interested stakeholders can identify which are the most promising practices to be implemented according to their community profile.

Since the worldly trend for human settlements is increased urbanization, and there are several urban design movements and incentives to repopulate urban areas in the United States,

1 The notion of success of an intentional community involves, for the purpose of this study, the endurance and continuity over time, the fidelity to its original mission/vision, the active pursuit of reinforcing its original mission and achieving proposed goals, the recognition of the community as a model community in literature, and the increase on real estate values over time.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 17

this study focuses mostly in urban and inner city EcoVillages. The only exception is the

EcoVillage at Ithaca which is located 1.5 miles from the city of Ithaca; all other case studies are connected with the urban fabric. The case studies chosen are some of the most remarkable and well-known EcoVillages in the United States and have been the subject of books and reports in the mainstream media, have been featured in specialized journals, and/or have been the subject of theses, dissertations, and other academic studies.

Research Questions

The research questions intend to explore the most important achievements of each community and to allow the comparison between them. Case studies and the comparative matrix will be structured around the following questions:

1) What is the overall profile of the community that allows comparison with other communities?

2) What are the sustainable measures applied in the community and how do they relate to its primary vision/design intentions?

3) Which sustainable measures are more recurrent in the communities studied and how do they relate to the community‘s profile?

Methodology

The intention of this study is not to establish an ideal model of sustainable community, but rather to analyze and compare contemporary intentional communities‘ sustainable living experiences and to present recommendations of best practices based on these experiences. The methodology that best fits this purpose is the comparison of multiple case studies. A literature

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 18

review is conducted prior to the case studies in order to identify a set of characteristics and practices that are worthy of analysis.

This research is structured according to the following framework:

1) Literature review – There is a large volume of literature describing alternatives that can be applied to communities in order to enhance the various aspects of sustainability. The initial part of this study consists in a literature review that intends to identify current issues and solutions on sustainability related to the built environment. The main authors in the field are identified, in addition to the main points of discussion and agreement in the field. The literature review reinforces the idea that the engagement into local-level activities and decision making is a requisite to achieve deeper sustainability.

The communities chosen for the case studies are rooted in sustainable principles and have conducted remarkable programs to reduce their impact in the natural environment.

2) Selection of case studies – The communities analyzed in this thesis are rooted in principles of social, environmental, and economic sustainability. These communities were selected according to a) urban location, and b) the volume of publications and information available:

a) The choice for urban communities resides in the trend of increasing

urbanization seen worldwide in the last decades. While rural communities provide the

possibility of a deeper relationship of interdependence with the natural environment, low

densities are less sustainable. Urban centers maximize the efficiency of infrastructure and

allow residents to participate in the global economy of products and services within a

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 19

short commute. Moreover, higher densities in urban centers allow the preservation of

native habitats, isolated from human disturbance.

b) The criteria of volume of credible publications and general information

available is essential to provide a significant analysis of the various aspects of each case

study. Availability of information and relevance – in an internet search, for example –

also suggests that a community is active2 and willing to propagate its principles and

experiences.

3) Multiple case studies – The methodology adopted in this research is the case study, as this model is largely utilized in the fields of architecture and planning to present and compare projects (Farr 2008; Ruano 1999). Information about the case studies were found in literature, the websites maintained by these communities (homepages and weblogs), field visits, direct conversation with community members, and in the information disclosed by community networks such as the Global Ecovillage Network and the Directory of Intentional Communities.

Case studies are divided into a) overview and b) best practices:

a) Overview: Describes the location of the community in relationship to the urban

center, the context and process of creation, and its most relevant characteristics.

b) Best Practices: Distinguishes specific projects and initiatives under interest

areas developed by the studied communities. This section also examines the efforts made

by the groups to share their learning and expand the EcoVillage movement. Several

2 Many of the communities listed as urban ecovillages in the Global Ecovillage Network webpage are either no longer active, do not have any books or articles written about them yet, or do not currently share sufficient information to write a case study about them.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 20

intentional communities participate in networks that exchange best practices and promote

learning.

4) Creation of a comparative matrix – The matrix is a legible, graphical manner of comparing the attributes of each community.

5) Comparative analysis – Describes the findings presented in the matrix and reveals similarities and differences between case studies. This analysis demonstrates recurrent goals and similar best practices adopted.

6) Findings – Presents a summary of alternatives that can be adopted by other communities that aim to become more sustainable.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 21

Chapter II: Literature Review

For the purpose of this study, it is important to define which factors contribute to increasing the sustainability of a community according to recognized authors in the field. The exploration of literature reveals various sets of guiding principles for designing sustainable communities proposed by different authors. These frameworks are usually comprehensive, including recommendations for the design process, physical characteristics of site design, low impact infrastructure, energy efficiency, , and others. For organizational purposes, strategies to enhance sustainability are here divided into social, environmental, and economic aspects. In the end of this chapter, the described strategies and objectives are arranged into a matrix of criteria that will be used to compare the communities studied in the next chapter.

Most of the vast literature on the topics of sustainable design and sustainable communities has been produced since the decade of 1990. On the other hand, one of the case studies (Village Homes) was designed and built in the 1970s, and two of the case studies

(EcoVillage at Ithaca and Los Angeles EcoVillage) were started in the beginning of the 1990s.

Hence, these communities are compared to one another and evaluated based on criteria stated in literature written after their creation. While some characteristics of the case studies might reflect dated technologies and respond to major issues of a specific period in time, most of their experiences can be largely applied today and serve as examples for communities striving to be sustainable. Moreover, the longer time a community survives and continues to be successful, the more it can be considered sustainable3.

3 “Capable of being sustained or continued over the long term, without adverse effects” as presented in Chapter 1 under “Definition of Sustainable.”

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 22

Village Homes was built in the 1970s, twenty years before the term sustainability was popularized in architecture and design and before many of the best practices for sustainable design were available in literature. Nevertheless, it is possible to affirm that most of the principles and strategies described in this chapter as criteria for sustainable communities were already part of the Village Homes‘ design intentions in a non-formulated manner. Evidence can be found in the fact that, in 2000, Judy and Michael Corbett (the designers of Village Homes) published the book Designing Sustainable Communities: Learning from Village Homes, which presents guiding principles for sustainable design and uses Village Homes—built more than two decades earlier—as a case study.

Designers and founders of communities studied in this thesis might not have had the state of the art criteria of sustainability—an always evolving definition—we have available today, but their vision of environmentally responsible communities anticipated and served as an inspiration for the sustainability criteria we have nowadays.

What makes a community sustainable?

The factors that contribute to making communities sustainable can be divided into three approaches: social-, environmental-, and economic-oriented strategies. This division is not exclusive, i.e., strategies can combine two or more of these elements. In this study, however, strategies are presented according to their main focus. Combined social, environmental, and economic approaches can create a community strongly rooted on sustainability principles. In synthesis, the goal of communities that intend to be sustainable is to combine enduring social relations, minimal environmental impact, maximum environmental restoration, and economic equity. Sustainable neighborhoods are those which are resource efficient, environmentally

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 23

sensitive, and that aim for human well-being and financial success (Hawken, Lovins, and Lovins

1999).

Social-oriented strategies

Develop and implement a shared vision

According to Timothy Beatley, each community should establish its own vision of how it defines sustainability. While the meanings attributed to sustainability and sustainable development are sometimes ambiguous and controversial, a shared vision of sustainability can be powerful and compelling (Beatley 1998, 233). An important point of consideration is the strategy for implementing the sustainability vision in a community. Local groups must be able to systematically formulate, plan, and carry out improvements to their immediate environment.

There are three main steps for defining and implementing a vision. First, it is essential to understand the effects of the current development patterns adopted by the community. In order to achieve a deeper understanding of the factors and how they affect the community, residents can make use of indicators (discussed under ―Provide for self-‖). In addition, geographical information systems and computer simulation technologies are becoming increasingly available, allowing citizens to understand better the impacts of human activities in the environment. Second, a vision of what a sustainable community should be needs to be formulated by community members in accordance to the specificities of the place. After the formulation of a vision, specific and practical targets that will lead to the achievement of that vision need to be defined. Targets are usually measurable and attached to a time frame and deadlines. Finally, the community has to develop strategies describing how these targets will be met (Beatley 1998, 356).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 24

The next challenge is to put in practice the actions determined by the strategies. In order to implement the strategies it is necessary to ensure commitment of public officials with the enactment of policies that will facilitate the achievement of sustainability goals and of citizens, who will make daily actions, such as purchases and voting, with the objective of contributing for the achievement of established targets.

Provide for local self-governance

Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living, a benchmark in the discussion about sustainable communities, emphasizes the importance of local communities and individual commitment and cooperation for the establishment of sustainable environments: ―… local communities are the focus for much that needs to be done in making the change to living sustainably‖ (Munro 1991, 5). In order to build a sustainable society, humans must seek harmony with other humans and nature, taking no more from the environment than nature can replenish.

Caring for the Earth proposes nine principles for building a sustainable society:

1) Respect and care for the community of life, 2) Improve the quality of human life, 3) Conserve the Earth's vitality and diversity, 4) Minimize the depletion of non-renewable resources, 5) Keep within the Earth's carrying capacity, 6) Change personal attitudes and practices, 7) Enable communities to care for their own environments, 8) Provide a national framework for integrating development and conservation, 9) Create a global alliance.

The seventh principle refers specifically to the local initiatives and empowerment of communities to take care of their bioregion. ―A sustainable world can be redesigned and rebuilt only from the bottom up. Locally self-reliant and self-organized communities are the building blocks for change‖ (Van der Ryn and Cowan 2007, 23). Supporting the same idea, the designers of Village Homes, a neighborhood that has a high level of resident participation, state that ―when

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 25

towns and cities are broken down into smaller neighborhood communities, many more people who would like to have leadership roles get such an opportunity‖ (Corbett and Corbett 2000,

142).

An example of how to empower local communities can be observed in the Philippines, where the enactment of a Local Government Code in 1991 assigned local governments with the responsibility of managing local environmental resources. According to this code, local officials acquire a major role in the sustainable development of their own communities by creating and enforcing policies locally and partnering with NGOs for environmental-related efforts.

Ultimately, the code empowers people and creates local accountability not only for environmental issues but for creating opportunity and equity for the local community (Hamm and others 1998, 162).

An important tool for increasing and facilitating citizens‘ participation in decisions that affect their community are sustainability indicators. Generally speaking, indicators are bits of information that describe a larger system, demonstrating changes and trends over time. Indicators are usually displayed in graphic form, as a way of disclosing information in an understandable manner that allows groups of people to make decisions based on the observations presented

(Tyler Norris Associates, Redefining Progress, and Sustainable Seattle 1997, 2).

According to Keiner, indicators can be used to: a) create awareness by making issues more perceptible and comprehensible, b) monitor a situation‘s complete picture and identify changes, c) facilitate decision making by comparing alternatives and their different results, d) evaluate progress towards sustainable development and identify the need for action, and e) benchmark by establishing comparisons between different units and assessing where the given unit stands. (Keiner, Schultz, and Schmid 2004, 234).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 26

Indicators are very specific to local conditions, identified problems, and improvement expectations by a group of residents. Thus, they need to be developed specifically for each city or community that will make use of them. A set of indicators formulated for a location will vary according to the cultural and geographical diversities of the area, the way sustainability is perceived by the formulators, and the extent of participation of stakeholders in the formulation process. Moreover, a set of indicators vary in number and weighting criteria, according to their focus on specific problem areas, and according to their function on the political decision-making process (Keiner, Schultz, and Schmid 2004, 234).

A remarkable example of taking advantage of sustainability indicators to drive progress is the B-Sustainable Project coordinated by the Sustainable Seattle initiative. Sustainable Seattle‘s strategy to make indicators more effective is to describe their significance, define the terms and data being measured, interpret data in an accessible textual form, evaluate trends according to community goals, and link the indicator to other data and systems. Examples of indicators are available in the website www.b-sustainable.org (Sustainable Seattle 2011). Through the availability of online indicators citizens have direct access to information, and they are able to understand how well their efforts are evolving into concrete reality.

Strengthen the community by connecting place with people

As well as empowering local communities, it is essential to nurture and establish new connections between place and people. The building of a sense of community and attachment to place contributes greatly for people‘s participation in, and support of sustainability initiatives.

―In our epoch of massive and spreading sameness, maintaining – indeed strengthening – the unique qualities of local places becomes both harder and ever more urgent‖

(Beatley and Newman 2009).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 27

Sustainable communities can only exist if there is a stable set of social values that support the long term management of natural resources. Historically, human societies have been able to sustain their lifestyles for hundreds of years. However, Western societies have evolved to a value system that is in constant change and that is grounded in consumerism, inefficient use of resources and high production of waste, frequent relocation, cult of lifestyle, fossil fuel addiction, and anthropocentrism. The design and continuity of sustainable communities can only happen with support from culture and society. ―Without sustainable values, landscapes designed to be sustainable will be misused, become unsustainable, and fail‖ (Thayer 1994, 249). In order to nurture sustainable values it is important to remain in a particular region, to learn about the place, to establish roots and take care of it—in summary, to belong to a place.

Recreational activities can be an important way to connect people to place. Outdoor activities, riding bicycles, enjoying close-to-home recreation, travels by train, and are efficient ways to make people more aware and care for their environment.

In addition to basic needs of food, water, and shelter, humans have more subjective necessities such as security, social interaction, esteem, and realization. Over thousands of years of evolution humans adapted to live in tribes and villages with direct social interaction. ―Humans are for the most part genetically adapted to the environment that existed from about 200 to

20,000 years ago. This adaptation involves not just our physical makeup but also our modes of perception and behavior and relates to the social environment as well as the physical environment‖ (Corbett and Corbett 2000, 58). The automobile-oriented design of our cities makes it more difficult for interaction to occur in neighborhoods.

Cities and communities have historically been built based on patterns of social interaction among people. ―The relationship between people and the environment goes both ways: humanity

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 28

both shapes and is shaped by its environment‖ (Corbett and Corbett 2000, 59). Besides addressing human basic needs, design should provide for opportunities of social interaction and for the development of a sense of pertaining to a place.

Sense of community can also be enhanced by educating and empowering residents to conduct projects to reduce their environmental impact. Another way to build solid bonds among neighbors is to have community events and parties in public spaces with activities directed to diverse ages. Community gardens are another powerful alternative to enhance the sense of community while addressing environmental issues. Community gardens can help to reduce the heat island effect, recover soils, and produce , while at the same time creating local jobs, educating residents, and fostering local artists‘ expression.

From his contact with sustainable initiatives in Australia, Timothy Beatley presents alternatives to create or revive the sense of place in communities:

 Support public art  Encourage people to get outside and in the public realm  Identify and preserve the icons that make a place recognizable  Encourage and empower citizens to make a place their own  Layer on new artistic expressions  Build new social and community institutions that will bring citizens closer to one another and the environments in which they live (Beatley and Newman 2009, 148).

Based on his experience in Australia, Beatley emphasizes that strengthening sense of community is a dynamic and continuous process. Communities change over time and their self- understanding needs to be constantly updated. Additional factors that contribute for building sense of community are the provision of:

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 29

 Various income level housing  Space for field games  Natural play areas  A large party or meeting facility  Spaces for informal gatherings  Recreational facilities (swimming pool, sports court)  Agricultural production  A small commercial center (Corbett and Corbett 2000).

Environmental-oriented strategies

Have an urban character and be connected to an

North American cities were built under the assumption that energy and land would always be abundant and available. A reflection of a consumerist lifestyle, is considered by many authors the most unsustainable and costly type of residential development existing. Among the negative outcomes of sprawl are the inefficient use of land, congestion, urban air pollution, high levels of carbon dioxide emissions, long distance between house and work, and consequent long commuting time, social disconnection, dependence on automobile and dependence on fossil fuels (Thayer 1994; Rees and Roseland 1998).

Urban location is one of the most affecting factors in the environmental impact of a community. Urban communities have the potential to be more self-reliant, less automobile- dependent, more pedestrian-friendly, and to have a more intense land-use. Higher densities and proximity to services, commerce, and work-place contribute for a more efficient use of space and resources and for an increased livability. A sustainable urban community should be ―walkable and transit-served urbanism integrated with high-performance buildings and high-performance infrastructure‖ (Farr 2008, 42).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 30

Transportation and mobility are key factors when determining how sustainable a community is. The choice for certain means of transportation determines the amount and type of energy and resources consumed. The American landscape is structured around the automobile, a

―random access, personal privacy, self-expression‖ transportation mode (Thayer 1994, 265).

Once a community is designed for automobiles it becomes almost impossible to give them up.

Nevertheless automobiles are highly costly, both economically and environmentally.

Current urban planning movements support dense neighborhoods with narrow streets and pedestrian access to essential services within a short walk. Increasing the use of public transportation by improving transit routes and quality of service, and encouraging walking and biking are essential to reduce driving and consequent pollution and . In a walkable design, streets must have adequate sidewalks and preferably be narrow, in order to reduce the speed of automobiles and ensure a safer environment for pedestrians. Daily need services should be close enough to be accessible by walking. Employment, recreation facilities, and more specialized services should be located in corridors of transit that are accessible from any neighborhood.

The eco-city approach, which aims to rebuild cities in balance with nature, proposes ten principles for increasing the sustainability of human communities:

1) Revise land-use priorities to create compact, diverse, green, safe, pleasant, and vital mixed-use communities near transit nodes and other transportation facilities; 2) Revise transportation priorities to favor foot, bicycle, cart, and transit over autos, and to emphasize ―access by proximity‖; 3) Restore damaged urban environments, especially creeks, shore lines, ridgelines, and wetlands; 4) Create decent, affordable, safe, convenient, and racially and economically mixed housing;

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 31

5) Nurture social justice and create improved opportunities for women, people of color, and the disabled; 6) Support local agriculture, urban greening projects, and community gardening; 7) Promote , innovative appropriate , and resource conservation while reducing pollution and hazardous waste, and the use and production of hazardous materials; 8) Work with businesses to support ecologically-sound economic activity while discouraging pollution, waste, and the use and production of hazardous materials; 9) Promote voluntary simplicity and discourage excessive consumption of material goods; 10) Increase awareness of the local environment and bioregion through activist and educational projects that increase public awareness of ecological sustainability issues. (Roseland 2001, 87)

Urban communities can incorporate many of the previously cited strategies for sustainable communities with overall efficiency. As a summary, sustainable urban communities can be considered as those which:

 make an efficient use of space (intense and mixed land-use);  have a low automobile dependence (availability of public transportation and bicycle and pedestrian ways);  make an efficient use of natural resources (energy efficiency, waste reduction);  have an increased self-reliance (local food and energy production, local water treatment); and  have an increased livability (sense of community, participation, equity).

Restore natural ecosystems

Sprawled development in the United States is responsible for major negative impacts on biodiversity. While humanized landscape becomes the dominant land use, only patches of species‘ original habitats remain. These habitats are often limited to nature preserves, parks, and other fragments of land. Species require large habitat areas linked to one another through corridors. Sprawled developments and highways contribute to the disconnection of corridors and habitats. In order to preserve the ecosystem biodiversity it is necessary to consider the greater

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 32

natural landscape as a continuous web of large habitats and linkages; in this scenario human habitats are just another part of this web. Developments should, therefore, be concentrated within limited boundaries. Linkages between developments should allow the connection of natural habitats so that the webs are able to coexist in the landscape. Also important is to restore the linkages that are already broken, such as riparian habitats.

One of the founding authors who promotes design and regional planning that respects natural ecosystems was Ian McHarg, who introduced Design with Nature as his own process of designing (McHarg 1969, 87). Design with Nature comprises a profound understanding of nature and its complex processes, and proposes an intensive and respectful integration of human process with the existing natural system. The design process starts with a suitability analysis in which nature is regarded as process and value; potential human uses and limitations are identified. The initial analysis consists of the identification of the major physical and biological processes based on climate data, historical geology, superficial geology, hydrology, soils, plant ecology, wildlife habitats, and land use. The designer then interprets and evaluates this data. For McHarg, design must consider the following criteria:

1) Negentropy – Design should increase the levels of order in the system; it should reduce entropy. 2) Apperception – Design should focus on the capacity to transmute energy into information and meaning, making intention visible at a more intuitive level. 3) Symbiosis – The cooperative arrangement that permits increase in the levels of order in the system. Symbiosis requires apperception so that elements can cooperate. 4) Fitness and fitting – The selection of a fit environment and the adaptation of that environment, and of the organism, to accomplish a better fitting. 5) Presence of health or pathology – Reevaluation of the existence or not of the previous criteria: creative fitting, negentropy, apperception, and symbiosis.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 33

The ultimate goal of these principles is to provide a complete integration and cooperative relationship between humans and natural ecosystems, what McHarg called ecological view. In

1969, before the popularization of the term sustainability in planning and design, McHarg urged readers to attend to the survival of human beings on the Earth and their stewardship role. ―In the quest for survival, success and fulfillment, the ecological view offers an invaluable insight. It shows the way for the man who would be the enzyme of the – its steward, enhancing the creative fit of man-environment, realizing man‘s design with nature.‖ (McHarg 1969, 197)

Other authors share McHarg‘s vision of environmentally oriented design. In Designing

Sustainable Communities: Learning from Village Homes, Judy and Michael Corbett present their understanding of natural systems and their relation to design. All living things survive based on complex relationships with other living beings and the environment. Human beings are just another element in the ecosystem and are dependent of its balance. Therefore, design should maintain or restore the previous balance of a natural area, granting the same importance given to human-oriented design features to natural features. ―Every living thing survives by numerous and subtle relationships with all living things and with the inanimate environment‖ (Corbett and

Corbett 2000, 53).

Another important characteristic of sustainable environments that needs to be supported by design is diversity. Diversity is important for both human and natural communities because it allows variation and self-adaptation for contingencies. Design must promote diversity to a broad extent. ―Ecosystems and parts of ecosystems composed of a wide variety of species tend to adapt better to environmental changes or human tampering than do those composed of fewer species‖

(Corbett and Corbett 2000, 54)

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 34

Provide infrastructure with net zero environmental impact

Water and : Water supply and quality are among the top priorities for promoting autonomy and sustainability in a community. As potable water becomes a scarce resource worldwide, it is essential that communities and buildings are designed with water saving, water reuse, and water recycling appliances. can be enhanced by reducing the water destined to irrigation of garden landscapes through the use of native species that are already adapted to the local environmental conditions and require less irrigation. Efficient irrigation appliances and the reuse of rain and gray waters are improvements that further contribute towards water conservation.

Human-made water supply systems usually collect water from surface or ground sources, purify it, and distribute it to users, who use it once and discard it into sewers. On the other hand, wetlands are nature‘s system for treating water, using mainly the Sun‘s energy, land, and a combination of microbial organisms, plants, animals, and water. Through the implementation of constructed wetlands, water can be cleansed and reused without major energy, mechanical, or chemical inputs. Constructed wetlands can also contribute to the aesthetics and functionality of landscapes.

Likewise, local water treatment structures can provide sewage treatment to neighborhoods at much lower cost than regional facilities and without environmental or safety hazards from combined sewer overflow. The Living Machine (livingmachines.com) is an example of a local water treatment system that consists of a sequence of tanks populated by organisms that degrade the waste water and generate a final product of better quality than that of conventional sewage treatment systems. Composted local sewage can then be used to fertilize and restore urban soils.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 35

Stormwater Management: Flood control and rainwater runoff reduction are essential strategies to prevent pollution in groundwater reservoirs. Urban environment surfaces usually have low permeability, preventing water from penetrating the soil and recharging the groundwater reservoirs. As water runs rapidly and in large amounts through pipes, chances of overflow and floods are increased. Since water collection systems are isolated from the rest of the environment, few species have the chance to benefit from the stages where water drains into the ground. In addition, people do not have visual access to part of the water cycle, which otherwise would play an important role in environmental education.

There are alternative stormwater management systems that can be implemented in communities in order to attenuate the above mentioned problems. Water that runs off from roofs can be directed to porous surfaces located adjacent to the lot, while water that runs off from ground surfaces can be conducted through open drainage swales. Larger amounts of run-off water can be conducted to overflow areas, wetlands, or retention ponds. The reduction of paved surfaces and the use of natural drainage systems such as raingardens and bioswales respectively reduce stormwater runoff and allow water to percolate into the soil. Moreover, natural drainage systems provide aesthetic and ecological values to a landscape, are cheaper that traditional infrastructure, and require less maintenance. Another valuable characteristic of natural drainage systems is that people are able to experience the functioning of the water cycle.

Energy: The next factor to be considered in the design of sustainable communities is the . The reliance of the United States and other countries on fossil fuels is cause of economic, environmental, and political stress, which cannot be continued long term. The continued research of sources and more efficient ways to use energy is promising for future design of truly sustainable communities. ―In the long run, every one of

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 36

humanity‘s physical needs must be satisfied either without the use of nonrenewable resources or through recovery and reuse of those resources‖ (Corbett and Corbett 2000, 56). The consumption of limited stocks of fossil fuels will eventually force the shift to solar energy as the main energy source to support life-systems. It is therefore necessary to improve and expand technologies and practices to collect solar energy.

Solar energy is the barest and the simplest energy source available on the planet. ―Part of the ecosystem is a complex system of energy transfers that depends, ultimately, on energy input‖

(Corbett and Corbett 2000, 55). Solar energy has multiple applications such as ambient heating

(through optimal solar orientation), water heating, and electricity generation through photovoltaic panels. Other viable sources of power for communities are wind-powered electric generators, biomass, and geothermal energy. Strategies to reduce energy consumption include using energy-efficient appliances, turning off equipment that is not in use, and using passive ventilation as a way to control temperature in buildings as much as possible. Finally, reducing consumerism, composting organic materials in backyards, drying clothes outdoors, and walking or bicycling instead of driving are additional ways of reducing energy consumption that can be incorporated into a community‘s lifestyle.

Consume or provide local food

One of the most important strategies to reduce a community‘s environmental impact is local food production (Farr 2008; Hawken, Lovins, and Lovins 1999; Corbett and Corbett 2000;

Thayer 1994; Roseland, Cureton, and Wornell 1998). The localization of the supply of essential needs (food, energy) makes a community more resilient to natural disasters and other unpredictable events.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 37

The dominant system of food production in the United States consists of large crops that rely on pesticides, deplete soil nutrients and stability, and require long distance shipping to the consumer‘s table. Local agriculture, on the other hand, avoids the use of pesticides and saves energy and resources needed for mechanical farming, transportation, and packaging. Trends in counter-stream agricultural practices are , Integrated Pest Management (IPM), drip and subsurface irrigation, and water recycling. Community gardens are also a strong trend in local agriculture. Secondary benefits of community gardens are reducing density (while they occupy private yards) creation of local jobs depending on the scale of food production, and reinvigoration of traditional social interaction.

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) is a viable alternative to create a connection between local growers and final consumers. In CSA‘s, shareholders pay in advance a portion of ‘s expenses and, in return, receive a weekly bounty of fresh vegetables and herbs. In this manner farmers have a guaranteed market and consumers have guaranteed better food, locally produced.

Economic-oriented strategies

Attribute adequate value to natural resources

Economics is perhaps the most important factor for global sustainability and, at the same time, the most difficult to address in small communities. As discussed briefly in the first chapter of this thesis, economics is a human construct and a part of society, which in turn exists within the natural environment. However, businesses have progressively acquired the power of controlling societies on a global scale, which makes it necessary to rethink the prevailing economic system in order to allow for a sustainable world society.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 38

One of the main authors in sustainable economics, Herman Daly, criticizes the current economic system as pretending the planet has unlimited resources and that growth can be sustained indeterminately. Economic growth is commonly seen as the solution to social problems such as poverty and unemployment. With the exponential population and economic growth experienced in the last few decades, it has become impossible to ignore that we live in a limited biosphere. The depletion of natural resources will eventually result in what Daly calls uneconomic growth, in which the value of natural resources depleted is higher than the value of man-made resources produced (Daly 2005, 100).

A sustainable economic system must admit that since we live on a planet with limited resources, the economy needs to reach a state of non-growth. In addition, our economic system needs to realize that natural resources and ecosystem services are the highest value commodities, and that their prices should vary according to their replenishing rate or their non-renewable character.

The attribution of costs for environmental depletion or for extraction of resources must take into account not only the perceivable damage that the activity poses to other systems, but also the cost for future generations. Damages such as global warming, , and soil erosion need to be accounted for through an estimate of future costs. Nevertheless, these costs are not easily estimated and there is not an accepted model to calculate them.

Herman Daly considers Cap-and-Trade systems to be a fair option of policy to limit environmental depletion and pollution. When such a system is implemented, industries have a quota of allowed pollution and have to pay for additional damages. A way that communities can address this issue is by pushing local governments to implement policies of resource

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 39

conservation and to keep track of the conditions of environmental resources in their regions through the use of indicators.

Support the local economy

The current globalized markets do not recognize the costs of destruction and pollution caused by the extraction of natural resources in goods supply regions. Consumers cannot perceive these negative effects because they do not experience the region‘s reality. Because of the consequences of the globalization of markets, our current economic system fails to account for local environmental impacts.

In the book Life Place, Robert Thayer discusses the importance of thinking of economics on a bioregional4 scale. Sustainable communities should be more closed systems, relying mostly on resources available in their nearby bioregions. The reasoning of bioregional economies turns to a primitive economic logic of trading natural values: use local resources and materials locally; then trade only surpluses. This principle goes against the global economic strategy of exploiting a single type of local resource on a scale for global trade.

Since the current trend is further globalization, regionalization of economies can only occur if regions consciously take steps towards the localization of production and consumption of goods. According to Thayer, local regions must ―take steps to sustain and fairly exchange the natural values embodied in their own regions through deliberate, locally controlled policies‖

(Thayer 2003).

4 A bioregion is “a unique region definable by natural (rather than political) boundaries with a geographic, climatic, hydrological, and ecological character capable of supporting unique human and nonhuman living communities” (Thayer 2003, 3).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 40

Communities and neighborhoods can play an important role in the regionalization of the economy by supporting local products and businesses, local food, and policies that encourage these businesses. Consuming locally produced goods and services increases local jobs and reduces the need for exporting services and goods. Producing and consuming local food is one of the most important strategies for communities intending to be more self-sufficient and reduce environmental impacts caused by large scale agriculture and necessary transportation.

Increase efficiency and reduce waste

In The Ecology of Commerce, Paul Hawken points out three main issues that need to be addressed by businesses in order to stop the destruction of natural systems. The first is to know what and how much resources are used to produce a good or to provide a service. The second is to account for the amount of energy employed in the production of goods and provision of services. The third is to recognize the amount of harmful and non-degradable byproducts resulting from manufacturing or, indirectly, from services (Hawken 2010).

The solution for these fundamental problems with current businesses can be found in nature‘s processes. First, in nature, waste equals food. Byproducts from living beings become food for other beings in a cycle of constant reuse. If this principle was applied to businesses, waste generated by one industry would be raw material for others and have monetary value.

Second, nature is powered by solar energy, which is the only input to our planet‘s almost closed system. Third, nature‘s stability relies on diversity of species and environments. Healthy systems are diverse and capable of preserving their own balance. The most intelligently designed economic system would mimic nature in every feature, what Hawken calls ―restorative economy‖; in nature, life‘s organizational principles (negentropy) create increased complexity and counterbalance entropy. Local communities can apply these ―restorative economy‖

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 41

principles by reducing waste (avoiding packaging, and doing composting and recycling, for example), by taking maximum advantage of solar energy for heating and electricity, and by supporting environmental and social diversity.

The consumerism that drives American society is responsible for vast amounts of waste diverted to landfills. and excessive packaging are main contributors. While packages have a very short life time, products themselves are designed to be out of style and fall apart, rapidly becoming waste. The disposal of solid waste consumes energy, land, and impacts ecosystems. Moreover, landfills have a limited capacity and communities strongly oppose the location of new disposal sites in their nearby areas. A more sustainable material flow consists in the ―reduction of consumption, reuse of products, and recycling of discarded materials‖ (Thayer

1994, 255).

The first step to reduce waste is to reduce consumerism and ownership. In a sustainable economy, while nondurable products should be completely biodegradable, durable products should not be owned, but leased as if they were a service. Instead of being sold, durable products should be licensed to users and maintained by a manufacturer or specialized company. Durable goods would not be thrown away by the final user. When a product does not attend to the demand the manufacturer would recall or replace it. Returning complex appliances to manufacturers allows the true recycling of a product. In a specialized company old parts could be re-assembled to be part of a new, more advanced product.

Although appliance-leasing businesses are not yet prevalent and ownership is a sign of social status, there are communities that are already applying reduced ownership principles. In car sharing programs residents of a community or city can rent cars for short periods of time, only when they judge necessary. Users do not have to deal with responsibilities such as

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 42

maintenance, insurance, and other costs. House appliances for laundry and kitchen can also be shared, as in the example of cohousing communities. The provision of common facilities for a group of residents eliminates the need for every household to individually acquire and maintain a number of appliances.

The partial communitarian interdependency created by the implementation of some of the strategies addressed can highly contribute to sustainability. Many strategies overlap benefits in social, environmental, and economic aspects. Despite the profusion of very promising technologies that contribute to sustainability, the continuity and proper utilization of systems depend on the awareness of designers, public policy makers, and especially of citizens. The vast majority of authors of sustainable urban design stress the importance of citizen engagement in the successful implementation and maintenance of these structures. It is essential to provide citizens with information and local decision-making power so that they can carry on design proposals and adapt according to the performance of the implemented strategy. Participation and political voice is essential to incorporate economic sustainability into communities and cities.

Summary and criteria for case study analysis

The following table summarizes the strategies and specific objectives of the three aspects of sustainability discussed in this chapter. The objectives described below represent the most discussed measures adopted by communities that intend to become more sustainable. The strategies and objectives in this table will be used for comparing the four case studies of communities presented in the next chapter.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 43

Sustainable Measures Dimension Strategy Objectives decade of establishment visioning sessions Develop and design charrettes implement a bought property shared vision received property as donation restricted to members faith based autonomy over local resources Provide for local with/influence over local government self-governance community meetings for decision making

use of indicators to measure trends or success Social common areas and facilities physical environment encourages social interaction encourage outdoor and ecological recreation

Strengthen the community events community by common meals connecting place public art with people online activity diversity of age diversity of income diversity of races integration with surroundings higher density discouragement of automobile use Have an urban mixed-use character and be connected to an connection to public transit urban area car share program

carpool program incentives to walking incentives to biking ecosystem conservation and restoration programs

Environmental Restore natural permaculture ecosystems support diversity of species water reuse systems Provide infrastructure with water efficient appliances net zero drought resistant landscaping environmental local water treatment systems impact green roofs

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 44

raingardens bioswales stormwater pond solar energy wind energy geothermal solar water heating local energy production contributes for the grid energy efficient furnaces heat recovery systems natural ventilation high insulation agricultural land Consume or Community Supported Agriculture provide local food community gardens edible landscape reduce consumerism Attribute adequate support policies for resource conservation value to natural resources measures to control pollution use of non-toxic materials office/work space available residents work in the community local retail

Support the local affordability economy availability of rental units

educational programs Economic partnership with universities partnership with local government waste reduction initiatives composting initiatives Increase efficiency reuse of waste materials and reduce waste use of local construction materials recycling programs leasing instead of owning

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 45

Comprehensive Theoretical Frameworks for Sustainable

Communities

The frameworks presented below are holistic statements of principles for sustainable design. More than providing strategies that enhance sustainability of communities, they provide comprehensive guidelines for design. Even though these frameworks are not used directly for analyzing and comparing the case studies of this thesis, it is important to present them as relevant pieces of literature that might serve as references for future study.

The first theoretical framework presented – Precepts of Biological Design – supports that design should follow nature‘s principles rigorously. Earth‘s natural systems have evolved over millions of years, and honed an utmost level of efficiency. Designers should attempt to imitate and adapt natural processes. While this framework was published in 1994, there is an increasing popularization of the idea of biomimicry5 in design. Drawing solid inspiration from natural systems is becoming a growing trend in the world of design.

The second framework – Ecological Design – has a similar approach to Precepts of

Biological Design. Ecological Design criticizes the lack of integration between the living and the built worlds. The five principles of Ecological Design intend to increase efficiency of buildings and to reduce their environmental impact, to restore disturbed natural systems, and to maintain a state of harmony with the natural world indefinitely. The five principles comprised in this theory involve many strategies described in the first part of this chapter, but combine them into holistic schemes on which to base design.

5 “Biomimicry is the science and practice of emulating nature’s best biological ideas to solve human problems.” (The Biomimicry Institute 2011)

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 46

Precepts of Biological Design

John and Nancy Todd are the founders of the New Alchemy Institute at Cape Cod, a research initiative that occurred from 1969 to 1992 as a response to human-created problems such as pollution and natural systems depletion. The objective of the authors‘ design principles is to incorporate principles inherent in the natural world to human problems, more specifically to human settlements. The precepts of biological design intend to reintroduce the thinking underlying truly sustainable and equitable means for supporting the peoples of the world. The following precepts emerged from the research conducted at New Alchemy, and are applicable to different situations:

1) The living world is the matrix for all design. This first principle is based on the idea that the Earth is a single living entity – the Gaia hypothesis – and capable of sustaining itself and holding characteristics beyond the sum of its constituent parts. There is an inherent intelligence behind natural systems that make them capable of performing self-corrections to continue existing. ―This living entity, made up of billions of interlocking, mutually interdependent, non- human lives surrounds us, contain us, and yet is one with us.‖ (Todd and Todd 1994, 20-1) The Gaia hypothesis reminds designers that the base for all human activity is a complex being beyond our comprehension.

2) Design should follow, not oppose, the laws of life. Design should mirror the existing models of biology as they reveal nature‘s functioning and continuity. This observation of biological patterns can happen on many scales, beginning from the cell, a basic structure of living beings that cooperates and integrates with other cells to form an organism. This lesson demonstrates that each part of nature contributes to a larger system that is more than the mere sum of its parts. Another important attribute of natural systems is their flexibility and ability to adapt according to seasons and cycles. Change is a constant in nature and is dealt with succession, the process of renovation of ecosystems. Finally, diversity is essential for a higher stability and efficiency of systems. These precepts should be considered as the desirable characteristics of design.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 47

3) Biological equity must determine design. Biological design cannot be dissociated from social justice. Natural resources should be fairly distributed and accessible to all.

4) Design must reflect bioregionality. Human physical and mental well-being is related to connection with the natural world. Biorregionalism has historically been an effortless and unselfconscious part of design in human evolution that links design and culture to geography, geology, hydrology, climate, and vegetation. Lessons from the ways native people dwelt provide a holistic insight to the optimal relationship between humans and nature.

5) Projects should be based on renewable energy sources. Our society‘s current dependence on non-renewable energy sources, such as fossil fuels, creates political tensions and reveals a lack of resilience. Renewable energies such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric should be developed and experimented on diverse scales.

6) Design should be sustainable through the integration of living systems. Using nature as a model, design should incorporate diverse functions in its structures.

7) Design should be co-evolutionary with the natural world. Technological advances and the immense amount of information available nowadays can help the replacement of fossil fuel or non-renewable energy powered technologies with organisms and information in a way to create a symbiosis between humans and nature. This can be achieved by understanding and adapting the intelligence existing in nature to the processes that supply human needs.

8) Building and design should help heal the planet. Design aided by technical knowledge can restore ecosystems and depleted natural resources.

9) Design should follow a sacred ecology. By developing a framework or a design concept that relates sacred and ecological principles, both the designer and the community members establish a higher-level of commitment with the implementation and management of practical alternatives to conserve and restore the natural environment. (Todd and Todd 1994, 19- 92)

Ecological Design

In a similar way to John and Nancy Todd‘s precepts, Sim van der Ryn and Stuart Cowan propose ecological design as a framework to address the current environmental crisis. Design is

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 48

understood as the ―intentional shaping of matter, energy, and process to meet a perceived need or desire‖ (Van der Ryn and Cowan 2007, 24). For the authors, the environmental crisis is a design crisis in which design professionals became trapped in standardized solutions that require huge amounts of energy and resources to be implemented. In addition, there is a lack of integration between the living world that has evolved over billions of years and the world built by humans; ecological design proposes interweaving human and natural design. Thus, ecological design consists of the effective adaptation to and integration with nature‘s process.

Ecological design has three main strategies to address natural capital loss: conservation, regeneration, and stewardship. Conservation consists in reducing the rate in which we consume natural resources, by making more efficient use and recycling materials. Regeneration involves expanding natural capital through the restoration of degraded ecosystems. Stewardship refers to our relationship with other living beings and with the landscape. None of these three strategies solely constitutes sustainability, but the combination of them results in the wise use and investment in natural capital. The ecological design process has five guiding principles that assist in the integration between design and ecology.

The first principle is Solutions Grow from Place. Sustainability begins with being responsible for the local environment and being concerned with local community issues. Rather than simply choosing solutions that were successful in another context, designers need to focus on potentialities and limitations offered by the specific site. Design must be conceptualized for the place in accordance with local features, including climate, topography, and resources available. Building form and materials used must reflect local conditions. Moreover, in order to make ecological design it is necessary to understand places through its inhabitants and their

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 49

multigenerational experience. Over hundreds of years, traditional practices developed techniques that regenerated people and ecosystems, allowing for longer survival.

The second principle, Ecological Accounting Informs Design, consists of detailed study of the flow of energy and materials through the life-cycle of products, buildings, landscapes, or cities. Energy accounting observes two laws: 1) energy stored in the inputs must equal the energy stored in the outputs plus any waste energy, and 2) energy degrades in quality or usefulness as it is converted from one form to another. By weaving these two laws into the design process it is possible to improve the efficiency of design and to assess its environmental impact. Life-cycle analysis is an effective way of quantifying the total energy and materials embodied in products, the energy they consume in their useful life, and the energy required for their disposal. The ultimate goal is to reduce or eliminate energy waste and to minimize energy conversion.

The third principle is Design with Nature, which states that every environment provides a particular set of critical design opportunities and constraints. Design with nature means to learn from nature‘s patterns of adaptation. Nature‘s design includes closing loops of production and consumption in a manner such that waste is converted into food. This principle could be applied to industrial processes in a way that the wastes of one industry are used as raw materials for another, both reducing the need for extracting raw materials from nature and minimizing pollution. Another example of nature‘s design that can be applied to human communities is the multiple ecosystem services provided simultaneously by one landscape. Among these services are flood control, water filtration, groundwater recharge, climate stabilization, and even human recreation.

The fourth principle, Everyone is a Designer, demonstrates the importance of the deep participation of community members in the decision making process, which ultimately affects

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 50

the design. Intuitive design involved in building and repairing skills has been replaced with technical knowledge fragmented into distinct disciplines. In the ecological design framework sustainability is a cultural process rather than a technical one. The inclusion of citizens in the design process can happen through the use of indicators that provide information about different aspects of the environment, and guide decision making. Other ways of involving community members in the design is through design charrettes, in which citizens cooperate with experts in order to achieve the best final design.

The fifth and last principle, Make Nature Visible, describes the importance of revealing the systems that support our lifestyles in the physical environment. Current design techniques conceal the manner through which we are connected to natural resources, and how they are obtained, converted to our necessities, and distributed. Ecological design proposes the visibility of nature and its systems as a new aesthetics of the built environment. In synthesis, making nature visible helps us to:

 See and become more aware of the abstractions we superimpose on the land;  Make complex natural processes visible and understandable;  Unmask systems and processes that remain hidden from view;  Emphasize our unrecognized connections to nature. (Van der Ryn and Cowan 2007, 189)

In synthesis, ecological design proposes the adequacy of human processes to natural processes, specifically to the local ecosystem. Design for a specific place requires extensive site analysis and energy accounting. Ecological design aims to mimic natural processes by improving the energy efficiency of the built environment and closing the loops of production, consumption, and waste. Moreover, the framework intends to increase participation, involve people in the design process, and reveal the contribution of natural systems for a community.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 51

Chapter III: Case Studies

The four case studies presented in this chapter were selected based on their location and success. All of the case studies are located within or nearby an urban area because urban location is a main factor for sustainability. Measures of success include: the continuation of the community and its original mission over time; the active pursuit of the original mission; the recognition of the community in the specialized literature; and the increase in real estate values over time. The amount of information available about the communities also influenced the selection of case studies.

Among other reasons, Village Homes was selected as a case study because of its extensive recognition in the literature about sustainable communities. Village Homes has been subject to numerous books, articles, and case studies of ecological communities. In addition,

Village Homes is denser than traditional subdivisions and connected to the urban fabric.

Although Village Homes is not part of the EcoVillage movement, it shares many aspects of community living and environmental strategies with EcoVillages.

The EcoVillage at Ithaca (EVI) was selected because it is one of the most known

EcoVillage-type communities, having achieved national and international recognition as a sustainable community. However, a reason for questioning the selection of EVI as a case study in this thesis is its location outside of Ithaca‘s urban fabric. That is due to the fact that Ithaca‘s urban area is very small and isolated by the surrounding hilly geography. Nevertheless, EVI is connected to downtown Ithaca through a bus line (about 15 minutes ride). Commuting by bicycle is practical and walking to the city is a possibility (45 minutes walk). Residents also make wide use of carpooling for commuting. EVI is closely associated with the city of Ithaca; even though it

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 52

is not part of the city‘s fabric, the sustainable strategies it has adopted are well applicable to urban communities.

The Los Angeles EcoVillage (LAEV) was selected as a case study because it is a pioneer urban EcoVillage initiative and demonstrates a unique living experience in a dense and consolidated urban environment. While there are many cohousing communities in dense urban areas, EcoVillages are not commonly found in such settings. LAEV is an exemplary model for urban communities striving for sustainability and trying to have a positive impact in their surroundings.

The Enright Ridge EcoVillage (EREV) was selected because, like LAEV, it is organized around an existing urban setting. Through the retrofit of blighted buildings and restoration of the physical aspects of its neighborhood, EREV develops community living based on an ecological approach. The fact that EREV is located in Cincinnati allows for easy access to information about the community and to actual experience on the community‘s operation. This fact was also significant for the selection of EREV as a case study.

Village Homes, Davis, California

Village Homes was designed and built in the 1970s, prior to the creation of the

EcoVillage movement. However, its designers share similar goals and strategies with

EcoVillages, making possible the comparison between Village Homes and those communities.

The main goals of Village Home‘s design are minimizing environmental impacts and energy consumption and encouraging social interaction and participation.

As shown in the map below, Village Homes is located near the University of California

Davis, the largest employer in the area, and downtown Davis.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 53

Figure 5 - Village Homes is located one mile away from the University of California Davis and two miles from downtown Davis Source: GoogleMaps

Over the years, Village Homes acquired a wide-spread reputation for having a high quality of life. With a total area of 60 acres with 242 dwelling units with mixed uses, Village

Homes is a remarkable attempt to integrate architecture and ecology with sustainable urban design. The development was considered a risky investment in the 1970s, but today it has the highest neighborhood real estate value in Davis.

Urban design

The innovative design of Village Homes was proposed as a clear opposition to the suburban life-style prevalent in the 1970s in the United States. The designers were concerned with the deterioration of inner cities and their surrounding neighborhoods. Cities were missing human-scale developments capable of instilling a sense of community, providing aesthetically pleasant environments, and addressing human basic needs as food, water, and shelter. The new built far from places of employment, commerce, recreation, and production made people

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 54

increasingly dependent on the automobile. This life-style is unhealthy, stressful, and it destroys

Earth‘s support systems (Corbett and Corbett 2000).

The land use adopted in Village Homes was innovative because of its higher density and distribution of lots and infrastructure. While typical American subdivisions have 32 foot wide streets and lots of 70 by 100 feet (7,000 square feet), Village Homes has 25 foot wide streets, with no adjacent sidewalks, and lots of 50 by 85 feet (4,250 square feet). The remaining 2,750 square feet, made available by the lean street design, are designated to common use areas, community facilities, agricultural land, sidewalks, and bikeways in the back of the lots

(Bainbridge, Corbett, and Hofacre 1979). Despite the difficulties for legal approval of a development with narrower streets and smaller lots than the conventional, the benefits of a compact subdivision were worth the effort.

The narrow streets are a key urban design element that provides economic, environmental, and social advantages to the neighborhood. For the economic aspect, narrower streets save money and resources in construction and maintenance. For the environmental aspect, narrower streets mean less paved surfaces and consequently reduced water runoff. Less streets‘ hard surfaces also absorb and reflect less solar heat, reducing the heat island effect. For the social aspect, narrow streets slow automobile traffic, making streets safer. The proximity between houses and the safer street environment provided by narrow streets are essential to enhance the sense of community. Narrow and calm streets invite residents outdoors and encourage interpersonal contact between neighbors. Streets also have a playful aspect: they are named after characters of the books The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 55

Figure 6 - The streets of Village Homes (left) are narrower than streets in other subdivisions. The area saved from narrow streets was destined to common spaces for residents. Source: (Francis 2003)

Village Homes has a network of walking and bike paths connected to the rest of the city and to the University of California, encouraging people to commute by bicycle and walking. The prohibition of through streets discourages the use of automobiles for short trips, which makes walking and biking the fastest ways to circulate inside the neighborhood. The constant utilization of sidewalks and bike paths promotes encounters and interaction between neighbors.

Solar design

Village Homes is nationally and internationally known for its solar urban design that is appropriate for the region‘s climate. In the summer, the Californian climate is hot during the days and cool during the nights, and in the winter it has mild temperatures with frequent rains. In response to the Californian climate, all streets are oriented east-west and all lots have a north- south orientation. The north-south orientation is ideal for passive conditioning since in the winter the south façade receives intense solar radiation while in the summer it can be protected from undesired sun with modest overhangs. The access to sun‘s light and heat is a fundamental right

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 56

for Village Homes‘ homeowners: the neighborhood has an internal building code named Solar

Rights that prohibits residents from blocking the sun over a neighbor‘s house.

Figure 7 - The streets at Village Homes are oriented east-west, allowing every house to have a façade oriented to south and receive intense solar radiation in the winter. Source: (Francis 2003)

Throughout the years, Village Homes‘ residents conducted extensive experimentation with technologies to take maximum advantage of solar energy. The usage of solar energy includes passive heating of interior spaces, photovoltaic panels (some residences have zero net electricity consumption), and rooftop solar water heating in most of the houses. The solar water heating system makes the neighborhood self-sufficient for hot water during seven months of the year, and covers 40 to 50 percent of the water heating energy during the rest of the year.

The optimization of passive conditioning is provided by the insulation of walls and roofs, and the utilization of double paned windows. Walls and roofs are light colored and made with high mass-materials, which store the solar heat during the day and, slowly, release it during the night. During the summer, houses are cooled through natural ventilation. Moreover, deciduous

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 57

trees placed strategically close to houses provide shade in the summer and allow solar heating in the winter.

Low impact site infrastructure: natural drainage system

Village Homes was designed with an innovative natural drainage system that consists of a network of creek beds, swales, and pond areas that allow rainwater to be absorbed into the ground rather than carried away through storm drains. Each group of eight houses has a contiguous common space apart from the street that includes percolation ponds for stormwater together with a play area, vegetable gardens and fruit trees. The curbs in the streets empty water into common area swales interrupted by numerous check dams or weirs. During winter—the wet season—stormwater is collected and percolated into the local soil, allowing temporary riparian planting. The retention ponds fill up after the rain and percolate in a matter of hours. The open drainage system holds 90 percent of the water runoff on site and allows for a rich ecological diversity (Thayer 1994).

Figure 8 - Diagram illustrating the functioning of the natural drainage system in Village Homes

The creeks designed for stormwater retention also provide residents with visibility and awareness of the water cycle. Creeks and ponds lay aligned to sidewalks and bicycle paths in the backyards of houses and are accessible to residents and visitors. In addition to draining and absorbing rainwater, ponds and swales create an environment for children to play.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 58

Figure 9 - The common backyard spaces shared by groups of eight houses comprise a natural stormwater management system composed of creeks and ponds. Source: (Francis 2003)

Community living

The intense sense of community was one of the most important goals during the process of envisioning Village Homes. Participation on decision making was also considered an important goal that contributes for a sense of true ownership in the community. Since early phases of the project, future residents were involved in the design and construction of their own homes.

Village Homes is organized in clusters of eight houses that share a common area of approximately 1/5 to 1/4 acre of land. The reason for this division is the premise that small groups allow more individual participation. According to the designers‘ observations, twenty years after the community was built, 10 to 20 percent of residents did not participate at all (but enjoy living in the neighborhood), 60 to 80 participated in the activities at the community in various levels, and 10 to 20 percent were very active in all areas (Corbett and Corbett 2000). Up

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 59

to the present date, people continue to participate and interact in the community and to maintain a sense of commitment towards the place and their neighbors.

Village Homes has a substantial amount of parks and recreation spaces, a day-care facility, and a commercial center. The community was designed to aggregate people of various income levels and to avoid the common social segregation that occurs in suburban areas. Village

Homes provides a unique mix of 600 square foot attached homes and 3,000 square foot luxurious homes in the same street (Thayer 1994). Common areas render spaces and create reasons for interaction. The swimming pool, the community center, and the playing field attract people from other neighborhoods to the community. These strategies for encouraging social interaction have measurable results: in 2000, the average number of neighbors known by Village Homes residents was 40, while in other neighborhoods of Davis it was 17 (Corbett and Corbett 2000).

Finally, the proximity to nature is another noteworthy characteristic of Village Homes.

The community has an orchard with a variety of trees and on shared backyard spaces, residents have space to cultivate vegetables, and there is edible landscaping throughout the neighborhood.

In addition, there is a seven acre common space reserved exclusively for agriculture; two of the residents rely on the local food production as an income source.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 60

Figure 10 - Village Homes community facilities and open spaces. Source: Google Maps

Summary

Village Homes‘ main strategies that figure in the Matrix of Sustainable Measures are:

 Strengthen the community by connecting place with people,  Have an urban character or be connected to an urban area,  Provide infrastructure with net zero environmental impact.

The sense of community in Village Homes is reinforced by design. The organization of the community in small clusters for shared decision-making and the multitude of common facilities and open spaces promote interaction among neighbors. Urban character and associated benefits are a result of the designers‘ intentions of presenting an alternative to sprawl. Low

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 61

impact infrastructure is provided mainly by the solar design and natural drainage system of

Village Homes. These alternatives have overlapping benefits and are not restricted to the pre- defined social, environmental or economic categories. As described in detail through this section, urban design, for example, helps to promote environmental sustainability and energy efficiency, at the same time it encourages social life and enhances the sense of community.

Several lessons can be learned from the community organization and initiatives that contribute to the richness of spaces and social life in Village Homes. Robert Thayer, who has lived in Village Homes since 1976, considers the three main features of the neighborhood as taming the automobile, saving household energy, and the successful open or ―natural‖ drainage system. The interaction and participation of residents in community activities is a complement to these remarkable features. According to Thayer, ―Village Homes encourages its residents to adopt sustainable behaviors in energy use, food production, water management, pedestrian and bicycles transportation, maintenance of wildlife habitat, commuting habits, and overall community interaction‖ (Thayer 1994, 292).

Thayer distinguishes two types of sustainable features in Villages Homes: the portable features and the unique features. The portable features are the ones that can be replicated anywhere else and include the solar oriented urban design, the physical features that discourage the use of the automobile, the natural drainage system, the various open spaces, and others. One of the unique features of Village Homes is the strong sense of community and the harmonious interaction between neighbors. This is in part due to the community being formed by like- minded people, many of whom work or study at UC Davis. These people are well-educated and tend to be more politically liberal (Thayer 2011).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 62

Figure 11 - Village Homes residents gather at Parque Chico after a weekly happy hour. Source: The author

As a critical evaluation of Village Homes after over three decades of existence, Thayer remarks that if such a community were to be designed nowadays, the development would probably have a higher density and be located in an underutilized urban area or brownfield

(Thayer 2011). Village Homes has a low gross density – approximately 4 units/acre – and it was built on land previously used as agricultural. The design of a sustainable community today should attempt to preserve agricultural land and restore areas previously occupied with environmentally damaging activities.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 63

EcoVillage at Ithaca, Ithaca, NY

The EcoVillage at Ithaca (EVI) is located on the west side of the city of Ithaca, New

York, in the Fingerlakes Region. EVI is one of the most acknowledged EcoVillages. As of 2005 it had been the subject of six master theses and one Ph.D. dissertation. It had also appeared in US and international mainstream media articles and had been the subject of many books as a case study of a sustainable community (Jackson and Svensson 2002; Ruano 1999; Walker 2005;

Miles 2008; Dawson 2006). Among the most remarkable features of EVI are the clustered co- housing model, the intense participation in education and research, and the fact that it is a showcase of community living and sustainable technologies.

According to Liz Walker, co-founder and community facilitator, the idea of establishing an EcoVillage started in 1991 with a group of individuals who intended to redesign the human habitat. The founders of EVI wanted to create a neighborhood that could house about 500 people and that addressed all aspects of human life – shelter, food, energy, work, social interaction, and recreation – while preserving natural ecosystems6. The initial step in the creation of EVI was assembling envisioning workshop sessions, in which a group of interested people contributed with ideas of what they wanted the future EcoVillage to be like. The main intentions were to have:

 Clustered co-housing neighborhoods  Abundant open space in the surroundings

6 The definition of EcoVillage formulated by Diane and Robert Gilman and adopted by the Global Ecovillage Network is that EcoVillages are usually small scale human settlements (50-500 members), urban or rural, in which all main functions of life are present: manufacture, commerce, food provision, social life, and recreation, harmlessly integrated to the natural world, supportive of healthy human development, and capable of continuing into the indefinite future (Bang 2005, 27).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 64

 Organic farm  Pedestrian oriented urban spaces inspired by Italian villages  Strong sense of community  Diversity of people  Solar energy technologies

In the beginning of 1992, after the establishment of the EcoVillage vision, the group registered as a non-profit organization and started looking for land to build a community under the principles of cohousing and using state of the art sustainable technologies. At the same time future residents wanted to have abundant agricultural and open space, they recognized the negative effects of sprawl and wanted to stay connected to the city of Ithaca. Despite having the chance to occupy with no cost a piece of land located about 10 miles from Ithaca, the group decided to purchase 175 acres of land 1.5 miles from Ithaca. Estimates of gas consumption for commuting to Ithaca demonstrate that in three decades the EcoVillage will have $716,000 in gasoline savings versus the alternative site (Walker 2005).

In 2006, EVI was connected to a bus route that provided more mobility to residents. In addition, the intense interaction among residents encourages carpooling. The small commuting distance allows residents to ride their bicycles to work. Many residents work full-time or part- time on site, making commuting less necessary. Nevertheless, in a visit to the community, Miles‘

(2008) observed that most residents still used their private cars to commute.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 65

Figure 12 - The EcoVillage at Ithaca is located about 1.5 miles of the city of Ithaca, NY. Source: Google Maps

Land use

EVI‘s land use plan was team-designed by two local architects, a landscape architect, a biologist, Cornell graduate students, and future village residents. The design process included an

Eco Village Land Use Planning Forum with 60 attendees, which had the goal of presenting the land use plan to the community and getting their input. The result of the forums were the

Guidelines for Development that ―covered all aspects of life at the community, from environmental goals and objectives to broad social goals related to affordability, diversity, and community‖ (Walker 2005, 28) and an Envisioning Plan that mapped the proposed development.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 66

Figure 13 - EcoVillage at Ithaca Envisioning Plan Source: (Envisioning a Post-Carbon City 2011)

The Envisioning Plan reserves 90 percent of the 175 acres area of the site as open space used for organic agriculture, woods, meadows, and wetlands. The 10 acres West Haven Farm is certified organic and run by a couple of residents of the community. The farm operates a

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) program that has 150 subscribers and an estimate of

1,000 people fed. A greenhouse and the five acres berry farm, Kestrel Perch Berries, are also part of the CSA. Residents can also cultivate a community garden. EVI holds permaculture workshops that teach techniques of soil recovery and applies them to its development plans. The goals for the future are to promote agriculture and land stewardship by establishing a large organic orchard and a farm stand to sell agricultural produce, and by conducting habitat restoration, and protecting native species.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 67

Figure 14 – West Haven Farm and CSA share pick-up. Source: (EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010)

Housing units are clustered into three neighborhoods of 30 residential units each and organized along a lively pedestrian street that connects them to a spacious Common House. The

Envisioning Plan also reserves space for an EcoVillage Education Center. The spatial configuration of EVI reflects the goal of increasing social interaction. Clustered housing, a common pedestrian path, and automobiles parked away from main spaces increase the opportunity for interaction (Jackson and Svensson 2002, 13).

Cohousing model and green building

The cohousing model adopted by EVI is inspired in the bofoellesskaber7, which originated in 1968 in Denmark. According to Walker (2005), the bofoellesskaber are successful cohousing communities that have privacy and a strong sense of belonging as main goals. These communities are formed by an average number of 10 to 35 private homes clustered around a shared common space. Cars are parked in the periphery, leaving space for pedestrian paths and greenery around houses. Bofoellesskaber have a central facility called ―Common House‖ where residents organize community meals and do their laundry, and children have space to play. In the

7 “Living communities” in Danish

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 68

bofoellesskaber, all spaces are designed and arranged in order to encourage informal interaction

(Walker 2005, 55-6).

Figure 15 - Pedestrian path at the FROG neighborhood. Source: (EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010), The author

Inspired in the bofoellesskaber, EVI is organized as three independent co-housing neighborhoods named FROG, SONG, and TREE (under construction). Each neighborhood is separately managed, organized, and planned by its residents. This division into small neighborhoods of 30 units promotes more integration and participation of people in group decisions. The two existing neighborhoods share social events, community projects, and overall governance (EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 69

Figure 16 - The EVI current configuration with FROG on the right and SONG on the left of the picture. Source: Google Maps

The First Residents Group neighborhood (FROG) construction started in 1995 and was completed in August of 1997. FROG was designed and built under the consulting of an architect and a builder. Housing units followed a standardized design and construction was closely monitored. FROG consists of 30 homes with different sizes and number of bedrooms and which are occupied by people from diverse age groups and professional backgrounds. Approximately

20 percent of the residents of the FROG co-housing units had Hispanic, African, and Asian origins (Jackson and Svensson 2002).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 70

Figure 17 - Co-housing plan for FROG neighborhood and current aspect Source: (EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010), The author

FROG houses were built for optimizing passive solar heating and natural lighting.

Housing units are highly insulated, share water heating systems, and are equipped with grey water re-use systems. FROG houses use 40 percent less gas and electricity than the average eastern US household (Walker 2005, 136). The neighborhood‘s Common House provides laundry facilities for its residents, office spaces, sitting room, craft room, dining room, and spaces for the community meetings and events to be realized.

Completed in 2006, the Second Neighborhood Group (SONG) consists of 30 homes and a Common House planned with the help of a permaculture consultant (EcoVillage at Ithaca

2010). The design and construction process of SONG was freer and less controlled. Residents – even those with no building experience – were responsible for the construction of their own homes. Because looser design guidelines SONG houses have a wide variety of green building systems, according to home owners‘ interests and budgets. Technologies applied in SONG houses include passive solar heating, solar water heating, photovoltaic panels, high-efficiency condensing gas boilers, eco-friendly foundations, super insulated walls and roofs, high- performance windows, rainwater collection, composting toilets and low-water flushing systems,

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 71

low flow faucets, drought resistant landscaping, use of salvaged building materials, and others

(Walker 2005; EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010).

Figure 18 - Overview of the SONG neighborhood Source: (EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010), The author

The Third Residential EcoVillage Experience (TREE) has already been planned and construction is expected to start in 2012. TREE was envisioned and planned by a group of future residents under the consulting of an architect and learning from the successes and failures of the first two neighborhoods. TREE was designed under passive solar guidelines to be much more energy efficient than the previous neighborhoods. TREE includes rental units that are meant to be affordable over time. Fully accessible housing units and common facilities that can accommodate all ages and people with disabilities are also part of TREE plan. TREE will share open spaces with the other two neighborhoods and participate in the existing CSA (Community

Supported Agriculture) and in the berry field.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 72

Figure 19 - Master Plan of TREE neighborhood. Source: (EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010)

Community living

EVI residents promote a variety of activities that foster interaction and create a supportive social environment. Among the social activities promoted by EVI are common meals that happen two to three times per week at each neighborhood‘s Common House. EcoVillage houses intentionally do not have ovens in order to increase the use of the Common Houses.

These facilities have large kitchens and dining rooms, providing adequate space for large gatherings. EVI residents also organize parties and entertainment activities with the objective to continually integrate neighbors and create meaningful social relationships.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 73

Figure 20 - Shared meals at the Common House and a community celebration. Source: (EcoVillage at Ithaca 2010)

Local businesses and services run by EVI residents are another important aspect of community living. Over the years, EVI developed an internal economy when residents started to establish their local businesses and offices and to create a local economic network. Residents provide services to one another, stimulating the growth of this micro-economy. According to

Walker, in 2005 more than ¾ of wage-earning adults worked at least part-time at the EcoVillage

(Walker 2005, 127).

The Cohousing model requires intense participation in community meetings. Residents meet regularly to discuss plans, objectives, and solutions for the community. A facilitator is designated to help the community to achieve a ―group mind‖ and common values. The model adopted for decision making is consensus, in which after a discussion the group reaches a decision approved by all members. In case where a person is strongly against a project, he or she can block a decision. Continuing disagreements have already resulted in members abandoning the community (Walker 2005, 89).

The EVI envisioners based their goals in a whole system approach, in the interconnectedness of human beings, the Earth, and the Cosmos. One of the main values in the

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 74

community is the cooperation among people and with nature. The common vision sustained by

EcoVillage residents is to live a simpler life, reducing costs and making environmentally responsible choices. Residents cultivate a sense of enoughness that allows them to focus on non- material assets and value the time dedicated to family and social relationships as much as the time committed to work. ―Our community design enhances our lives, enabling us to live simply, in harmonious and supportive community with each other, while retaining the freedom to spend our time on the things we value most‖ (Walker 2005).

Education and outreach

One important goal envisioned by the founders of EVI is the communication of its achievements with educational purposes to sustainable practices. EVI currently cooperates with local universities Ithaca College and Cornell University involving students in courses about sustainability. Ithaca College has partnered with EVI to develop a curriculum and coursework on

―Science of Sustainability‖. EVI also hosts groups of visitors from many states of US and from other countries and provides internships and volunteer positions in hands-on projects.

In addition, EVI cooperated with Tompkins County to develop the Sustainable Tompkins

County Project. The project started in 2003 with a workshop gathering 40 local leaders; later, a specialist was hired to conduct a feasibility study. ―EVI is a major player in an initiative to make

Tompkins County, where it is located, more sustainable. Committees associated with this scheme are working on a city car-share scheme, a green development in the city, waste management, sustainability circles in the schools and many other initiatives‖ (Dawson 2006, 31).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 75

Summary

The main strategies figuring in the Matrix of Sustainable Measures and applied at the

EcoVillage at Ithaca are:

 Develop and implement a shared vision  Provide for local self-governance  Strengthen the community by connecting place with people  Provide infrastructure with net zero environmental impact  Support the local economy

The process of creation of EVI received intense input from future residents and consulting from a group of a multi-disciplinary planning team. The utilization of a participatory design process allowed future residents to envision and define clearly the goals they had for the community. The cohousing model applied at EVI requires residents to participate frequently and intensely in the decision making processes. The division of the community into three smaller neighborhoods encourages participation and empowers residents. Intense social interaction through meetings and community events enhances the sense of community at EVI. The community strives to create a supportive social environment, one of the primary goals of EVI.

The founders of EVI intended it to be an experimentation field and showcase of sustainable practices, with eventual educational purposes. EVI applies strategies for environmental sustainability as solar design, energy efficiency, and resource conservation. The ultimate intention of the EVI is to be a model of sustainable living that is appealing to mainstream society, the middle-class American family. The ―EcoVillage at Ithaca was envisioned and designed specifically to model an alternative to this version (the suburban neighborhood) of the American Dream‖ (Fischetti 2008, 115).

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 76

EVI supports the local economy by providing space for its residents to work in the community and by stimulating local businesses. EVI also contributes to Ithaca‘s local economy by partnering with local universities and government.

EVI is valuable as an experience and showcase of alternatives for sustainable living.

However, its location in isolation from the city of Ithaca is a factor that increases its environmental impact. Costs of commuting and the use of a large parcel of land for a small number of people might be pointed out as possible flaws of EVI. Affordability is currently a major issue at EVI. The community was envisioned to be economically diverse, but FROG and

SONG property values were gradually increased by the recognition of EVI‘s high quality of life, achieving high appraisals. The reduced size of the community also makes units‘ construction costs higher than initially expected. Lack of fully accessible houses for elderly and persons with disabilities is another major issue identified at EVI. The construction of TREE intends to provide smaller and rental housing units in order to allow lower income families to be part of the

EcoVillage. In addition to addressing affordability, the design of TREE also provides accessible units for the elderly and people with disabilities. In conclusion, EVI is continuously learning from its experiences and striving to provide a more sustainable living to its residents and to the local community.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 77

Los Angeles Eco-Village, Los Angeles, California

Figure 21 - The Los Angeles EcoVillage is located west of downtown Los Angeles in a densely urbanized area. Source: Google Maps

The Los Angeles Eco-Village (LAEV) was founded in January of 1993 with the goal of achieving and sustaining a better quality of life within an urban environment. The community is located in a dense and traffic congested two block urban neighborhood of about 11 acres, approximately three miles west of downtown Los Angeles. LAEV has 40 members, 35 of which moved to the neighborhood in order to be a part of the EcoVillage; the whole neighborhood has about 500 people.

The two blocks occupied by the EcoVillage are part of a mixed use working class neighborhood, including an alcohol and drug recovery center, two auto repair shops, a K-2 public school, a nonprofit community center for low-income people, a Church, and an English as a Second Language school (Cooperative Resources and Services Project 2010). The

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 78

neighborhood has a rich diversity of people, including about 15 ethnic groups and different household compositions; the age groups vary from children to elderly.

Figure 22 - The boundaries of the Los Angeles EcoVillage. The two buildings owned by the CRSP are highlighted. Source: Google Maps

LAEV is sponsored by the group Cooperative Resources and Services Project (CRSP), a non-profit organization founded in 1980 that supports small ecological cooperative communities to achieve more sustainable and greener lifestyles. The CRSP is funded by its own ecological revolving loan fund, whose monies come from private lenders. The goal of CRSP is to demonstrate processes that make an urban neighborhood more sustainable in social, environmental, and economic aspects, and that increase the quality of life in its immediate surroundings. CRSP intends to be a showcase of sustainable development by sharing processes,

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 79

strategies, and techniques with interested groups. A common practice of ecovillages is to share experiences with other neighborhoods and communities worldwide through the Global

Ecovillage Network. The founder of LAEV, Lois Arkin, is ―spreading the message, stoking sustainability pots all over the city and region, serving as catalyst and inspiration for others who understand the need to change the cities in which we live‖ (Beatley 2009).

Restoring the urban environment

In the beginning of the 1990s, prior to the foundation of LAEV, the non-profit organization CRSP already had plans for the creation of an EcoVillage in Los Angeles, but in a different location. The original EcoVillage plans were for a landfill site about five miles northeast of Los Angeles downtown in a property owned by the Department of Water and Power

(Arkin 1992, 273-4). The plans changed when the civil unrest happened in Los Angeles on April of 1992, after a group of four Los Angeles policemen were found innocent in court from beating up an African American man. The riot, which lasted about a week, was also associated with the high unemployment rates and poverty existing in Los Angeles at that time. The declining quality of life and the tensions resulting from the riot urged the CRSP to found an EcoVillage in an urban neighborhood. LAEV had and still has the goal of responding to Los Angeles‘ economic gaps and social issues, and to make possible a healthy living in such urban environment.

Unlike many EcoVillages, which are implemented on undeveloped land, LAEV takes advantage of the existing infrastructure available in the urban environment. Despite the benefits drawn from an urban location, the previously built environment has less space for the application of innovative building techniques and for agriculture. Because of its urban setting, LAEV has to

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 80

tackle ―the much harder job of retrofitting, restoring, retooling an already formed and damaged urban landscape‖ (Beatley 2009).

The approach adopted by the community is to purchase properties in the surrounding areas and rehabilitate them as affordable co-op housing. Rehabilitation improves overall living conditions and makes housing units more energy and resource efficient. Among the initiatives related to increasing the efficiency of LAEV apartments is the Neighborhood Energy and Water

Conservation Co-op program, which consists of the installation of energy and water saving devices in housing units.

Figure 23 - Water reuse system in the ecovillage apartments. Used water from the washing machine can be flushed into the community gardens through a system of pipes. Residents use biodegradable laundry detergents. Source: The author

With the financial resources provided by the CRSP‘s Ecological Revolving Loan Fund,

LAEV has been acquiring, rehabilitating, and ecologically retrofitting buildings in the neighborhood. In 1996, CRSP purchased a 40 unit apartment building in the junction of Bimini and White House Place. In 1999, an 8 unit adjacent building was also acquired for retrofitting

(Fellowship for Intentional Community 2010). Members are developing an equity-housing

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 81

cooperative that will purchase more properties in the neighborhood, renew them, and provide the community with training in building rehabilitation techniques.

Environmentally oriented activities

LAEV encourages its members and the adjacent neighborhood to reduce waste, reuse products, use landfill materials in construction, and recycle or the waste that cannot be reused. There are composting bins and holes in the gardens that surround LAEV buildings.

LAEV estimates that approximately 100 cubic yards of green waste have been composted in the

EcoVillage (Cooperative Resources and Services Project 2010).

There are nearly 24 small gardens and 100 trees in the neighborhood that are maintained by EcoVillage members. LAEV encourages permaculture and soil regenerating activities in the land available in the properties. Local food production is not substantial due to limitations of land in the urban area. Gardening and small scale food production is supported by the LA Eco-

Village Gardeners' Weblog (LAEV Gardeners 2010).

Figure 24 – Composting pit and community garden in the courtyard of the main building. Source: The author

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 82

LAEV is located in a very dense neighborhood within 2 to 15 minutes walk of 20 bus lines and 2 Metro Red Line subway stops. Easy access is a major encouragement for residents to use public transportation. Furthermore, LAEV discourages residents to own automobiles.

Currently, CRSP offers a $20 discount in monthly rent to the residents that do not own a car, approximately half of the members of the EcoVillage. LAEV also intends to develop a car co-op program that will incentive even more people willing to give up automobile ownership.

Residents also have a strong bicycle culture and many use their bicycles for commuting.

In 2005, LAEV was responsible for starting the Bicycle Kitchen, a non-profit organization run by volunteers with the purpose of providing space, tools, and bicycle parts for people who want to work in their own bikes. Volunteers provide help by answering questions about how to fix the bicycles. The project, which was once located in the LAEV, is now located a few blocks south of the EcoVillage.

Figure 25 - The room where the Bicycle Kitchen used to be is now used by residents to store their bicycles. Source: The author

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 83

Education and outreach

One of the main goals of LAEV is to demonstrate the feasibility of a healthy neighborhood, ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable. LAEV‘s description provided in the Directory for Intentional Community is ―a public demonstration of sustainable community development‖ by sharing our processes, strategies and techniques (Fellowship for

Intentional Community 2010). LAEV promotes the expansion of the network of EcoVillages by teaching guidelines on how to start an EcoVillage in other neighborhoods.

Among the means of sharing these experiences are neighborhood tours with the theme

―the process of creating a sustainable community‖ and affordable accommodations to visitors, talks, workshops, and conferences on topics related to sustainability, public advocacy and the media. LAEV maintains several weblogs frequently updated with news and ideas from residents on topics related to the community (LAEV Gardeners 2010; Los Angeles Eco-Village 2010b;

Los Angeles Eco-Village 2010a).

CRSP is an umbrella organization for many others that have the goal of improving the quality of urban living in social, environmental, and economic aspects, and demonstrating sustainable practices. Among these are Echo Park Time Bank, Eco Maya, and Community Land

Trust.

Community living

LAEV members meet weekly to discuss new or existing projects involving the buildings owned by the CRSP, the community organization, and neighborhood issues. The promotion of regular meetings and gatherings open to non-members of the EcoVillage is responsible for enhancing the sense of community of the group. LAEV encourages the creation of jobs in the

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 84

community, supports local business, and promotes workshops and lectures on themes that can become a source of employment such as permaculture, gardening, and green building. Currently, several members live and work at the neighborhood.

LAEV public spaces are equipped with works of art made by its residents. The creative expression of residents in public areas identifies the community and differentiates it from the rest of Los Angeles as a unique place. The philosophy of EcoVillage learning and sharing sustainable practices has attracted approximately 35 people to the neighborhood who became members of

LAEV. In addition to participating of meeting and social community activities, EcoVillage members are usually very committed to sustainability and are activists for social, ecological, and urban causes.

Figure 26 - LAEV is full with public art works. Source: The author

The LAEV vision is founded in the ―whole systems‖ approach, which consists in the integration of social, economic, and physical aspects of the community life. The past and ongoing projects aim to respond to neighborhood issues and to balance and incorporate economic, social, and ecological activities. In addition, Lois Arkin sustains that the choice of being a member of an EcoVillage is to adopt a voluntary simplicity lifestyle, to live a rich life

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 85

with less materials, energy, and waste (Cooperative Resources and Services Project 2010;

Beatley 2009; Los Angeles Eco-Village 2010a). According to Timothy Beatley, ―the Ecovillage represents a compelling model of how to begin to transform dysfunctional and unsustainable urban (and suburban) environments into real places, places with soul and meaning and commitment to community and environment.‖ (Beatley 2009)

Summary

LAEV applies the following strategies of the Matrix of Sustainable Measures:

 Strengthen the community by connecting place with people  Have an urban character and be connected to an urban area  Support the local economy  Increase efficiency and reduce waste

LAEV provides a supportive social environment for its residents and neighbors by holding various community events and meetings, and organizing workshops and educational events about sustainable living, building techniques, permaculture, and others. The high density of residents living in the CRSP apartments also contributes for more opportunities for social interaction.

Being located in a dense urban area is what mainly differentiates LAEV from other

EcoVillages. Challenges of starting an EcoVillage in an urban area include the impossibility of envisioning an ideal built environment, the lack of land for agriculture and outdoor recreation, and the need to adapt to existing infrastructure and city urban building codes. The unique urban character also provides benefits such as increased and less costly mobility, proximity to retail

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 86

and services, existing infrastructure and buildings, and not requiring a large investment to start the community.

One of LAEV‘s main strengths is its support to the neighborhood‘s local economy. Many residents have their offices in the neighborhood and most co-op apartments are affordable.

LAEV applies various waste management strategies. Residents are encouraged to reduce consumerism and reduce waste, to reuse materials as much as possible, and to recycle or compost on-site what cannot be reused.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 87

Enright Ridge Eco-village, Cincinnati, Ohio

Founded in 2004, the Enright Ridge Eco-village is located in East Price Hill, a few minutes west from Cincinnati‘s central business district. The EcoVillage has a linear configuration along the Enright Avenue – a half-mile street on a ridge surrounded by approximately 200 acres of woods. Most houses in East Price Hill were built in the beginning of the 20th century.

Figure 27 - Location of the Enright Ridge EcoVillage Source: Google Maps

The idea of creating an EcoVillage originated from the combined intentions of its two principal envisioners: Jim and Eileen Schenk. While Jim wished to live in a neighborhood that

―valued green living, with protected land, , resource conservation, alternative energy, and cooperative relationships with happy children and older people‖ (Schenk 2005, 52),

Eileen valued the positive aspects of living in an urban environment such as the higher chance of interaction because of the higher density, the access to public transportation, and the employment opportunities. Before picturing an EcoVillage in Cincinnati, Jim and Eileen already ran the non-

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 88

profit organization Imago for the Earth, which focuses in environmental restoration and urban revitalization. Imago‘s mission is to foster a deeper harmony with Earth by providing educational experiences, creating opportunities for discussion and community building, and conserving natural areas (Imago for the Earth 2010).

Envisioning and creation process

In the 1990s, Imago decided to have a more substantial participation in its immediate surroundings by founding an urban EcoVillage in East Price Hill. The main goal was to improve the neighborhood‘s physical environment qualities. Eventually, a group of neighbors of Price

Hill, encouraged by Imago‘s plans, started to discuss a vision to make that community more sustainable.

In 1999, a class of students from the School of Planning of the University of Cincinnati formulated and presented a plan for East Price Hill entitled ―Seminary Square Eco-Village Work

Plan‖ (University of Cincinnati 1999). The plan covered a 50 block area in the center of the neighborhood. Students conducted an extensive analysis identifying the main issues that needed to be addressed by the project. The main problems were related to the blighted state of the physical environment. Most houses in the neighborhood were built in the first half of the 20th century and were in poor conditions. 11 percent of the buildings in the study area were vacant, while 68 percent were renter occupied. Moreover, the neighborhood‘s business district has been shrinking and physically decaying in the last few decades.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 89

Figure 28 - Location of the Seminary Square Eco-village in East Price Hill and the proposed location of open spaces and walking trail. Source: (University of Cincinnati 1999)

The EcoVillage proposal focused on improving the existing housing conditions and the visual aspect of streets, especially in the business district. One of the goals of the plan was to encourage home ownership, since it is associated with a higher commitment and connection with the surrounding neighborhood. In order to improve the existing house stock and promote home ownership, an essential part of the plan was the foundation of the Eco-Housing Center a

―resource for current and potential homeowners and renters to determine the availability of homeownership and rehabilitation‖ (University of Cincinnati 1999).

The plan also proposed the improvement of the streetscapes and facades in the business district. It also stressed the importance of making residents aware of the trash accumulation problem and encouraged people to recycle. The plan included a project of revitalization of existing open spaces, parks and squares, which were currently underutilized, in addition to the creation of a walking trail in the neighborhood.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 90

Figure 29 - Proposal for the revitalization of the business district at the Warsaw Avenue. Source: (University of Cincinnati 1999)

In 1998, Imago received a grant to develop the Seminary Square Eco-Village project. The funds were used to improve the streetscape, the facades of buildings and to ecologically rehabilitate six offices and three houses (Schenk 2005, 52). Despite the efforts towards the elaboration of a work plan and its implementation, the project was not successful. The main reasons identified by the community for the lack of success in the implementation of the plan were that the area designed for the Seminary Square EcoVillage was too large and too deteriorated. Properties within the project limits had a large number of transient renters, which posed difficulties for housing improvement projects. Another important issue that contributed for the failure of this project was that few residents in the area were interested and committed to

EcoVillage principles.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 91

After the unsuccessful attempt of creating the Seminary Square EcoVillage, a group of

East Price Hill neighbors reviewed the plans and initiated efforts to implement an EcoVillage in a new location along a street in the neighborhood. According to Jim Schenk, only five households were necessary to initiate the

EcoVillage; other households followed the initiative over time. A group of residents dedicate to EcoVillage ideals declared Enright

Avenue an urban EcoVillage. The Enright

Avenue has 90 households, 25 of which are committed to ecological values of the

EcoVillage. According to Schenk, ―people were open to it mainly because homeowners feared a major decline in housing values if our neighborhood didn‘t do something to reverse the trend of decline‖ (Schenk 2005, 55).

Enright Avenue had several assets that contribute for it being place for a sustainable Figure 30 - The area highlighted represents the properties that are part of the Enright Ridge EcoVillage. community: it was close to bus lines and to Imago for the Earth owns approximately 35 acres of land, most of which are natural preserves. downtown Cincinnati, within walking Source: Google Maps distance of a consolidated business district, located in a south-faced ridge, had a higher ownership rate, and included Imago for the Earth, a 16 acre urban nature preserve, and the Earth

Center, an 8 acres wooded area owned by Imago. Back in the 1990s, Imago had already initiated a program to improve houses in the area by upgrading insulation, installing double paned

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 92

windows, and replacing light bulbs and furnaces with energy-efficient appliances. Because of that, many residences were already more energy efficient than the average residences in East

Price Hill.

After identifying a more favorable environment at Enright Avenue, in 2004 residents created the Enright Ridge Urban Eco-village, whose mission is ―fostering a sustainable urban neighborhood, who promotes preserving the planet through social, economic and healthy lifestyles and who demonstrates urban revitalization using these principles‖ (Enright Ridge

Urban Ecovillage 2010). EcoVillage members formed six committees, divided into main areas of concern and action: housing promotion, communications, long range planning, fund raising, promotion task force, and green living committees. The community also established five main objectives for itself:

1. To create a comprehensive community building, community development corporation 2. Work to revitalize the neighborhood around the Imago Earth Center in Price Hill, in Cincinnati 3. To encourage home ownership and make the homes and land in the Eco-village as ecologically friendly as possible 4. To foster a true community of people who care, support, learn, work, and make decisions together. 5. Serve as a model of urban revitalization

Enright Ridge uses Robert Gilman‘s definition of EcoVillages: 1) human-scale, 2) full- featured settlement, 3) in which human activities are harmlessly integrated into the natural world,

4) in a way that is supportive of healthy human development and can be successfully continued into the indefinite future.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 93

Restoring the urban environment

The effort of implementing and maintaining and urban EcoVillage involves the adjustment of the EcoVillage living ideals to an existing neighborhood in a consolidated urban fabric, to the previous residents, and to municipal building codes and regulations. ―It‘s so much easier to develop sustainable homes, alternative energy systems, constructed wetlands, and so on from scratch on raw land‖ (Schenk 2005, 56). Despite the challenges involved on urban

EcoVillages, most of world‘s population – and increasing – lives in urban areas and it is crucial to experiment and set a model for sustainable living in densely populated areas. ―Possibly the most important reason for developing an urban retrofit-neighborhood EcoVillage is that the majority of people in our country and in the world now live in urban areas‖ (Schenk 2005, 56).

Urban EcoVillages are also an alternative to sprawled developments and their associated problems: by improving the urban environment, making it more livable and beautiful, and increasing green space, cities become more attractive to middle-class, people who are still leaving the city for an alleged better quality of life in the suburbs.

Schenk (2005) points out some of the challenges of implementing an urban EcoVillage in an existing neighborhood. The housing stock was not designed to take advantage of passive solar heating and lighting, and has deficient insulation. The configuration of streets privileges automobiles instead of pedestrians and bicycles and does not incorporate meeting places into sidewalks. EcoVillage members have little control over the properties and to whom they are sold or rented. Finally, people that move into the neighborhood are not necessarily in accordance with

EcoVillage ideals and people interested in joining the community may not find a property for sale or rent.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 94

On the other hand, the implementation of an urban EcoVillage has some advantages, especially regarding the environmental aspect of sustainability and the conservation of resources.

Since the housing stock is already built, there is little need to harvest raw materials or spend energy on new construction. According to Schenk (2005), retrofitting buildings costs much less than building them from scratch. The neighborhood is already part of the urban services areas and its residents have more chance of employment nearby. Finally, rather than spending time on discussions about the EcoVillage‘s site plan, the design and construction of buildings, and on organizing fundraising strategies for purchasing land and financing construction, members are able to focus on short term initiatives to improve current neighborhood conditions.

The Enright Ridge Eco-village helped to increase the ownership rate in the neighborhood to 85 percent. The housing committee has saved four foreclosed houses from being bought by investors. These houses were purchased, rehabilitated, and sold to homeowners interested in living more sustainably and with the EcoVillage values. The housing committee also purchased and rehabilitated a three story building in the neighborhood that is now rented to the Cincinnati

Zen Center.

Residents are also encouraged to make improvements in their properties individually.

Among the types of expected improvements to residences are the insulation of walls and ceilings, the sealing of cracks, the use of energy-efficient light bulbs, the replacement of simple windows with double glazed windows, the installation of energy-efficient furnaces and water heaters, the installation of energy efficient appliances, the use low or no VOC paints, and the installation of solar water heaters.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 95

The Enright Ridge EcoVillage partners with the pre-existing non-profit organization

Imago for the Earth in applications for grants that fund projects in the neighborhood, such as the installation of raingardens in properties‘ yards. In addition to grants, the EcoVillage is economically supported by a financial foundation that lends money at a low interest rate. This aid has been essential to allow the purchase and rehabilitation of residential properties in the neighborhood.

A major concern at the Enright Ridge EcoVillage is to encourage its residents to reduce automobile use; instead, residents are encouraged to walk, ride the bus, and ride bicycles.

Walking in the woods was also fostered by the implementation of a two mile walking trail behind houses.

Environment and education

As environmental improvement initiatives, the EcoVillage encourages residents to pick up trash and keep the street clean, recycle their household waste, plant trees, landscape yards, and eradicate invasive plant species. The Enright Ridge EcoVillage is currently attempting to deal with the issue of stormwater runoff by supporting the construction of raingardens in the backyards of residences.

A partnership between the Enright Ridge EcoVillage and Imago for the Earth is responsible for organizing educational projects and events such as workshops for ecological building techniques and house retrofitting. Imago has also hired a professional to provide children with after school educational and recreational activities. Another significant program towards education conducted by Imago is a summer camp with diverse themes related to the natural environment and providing practical experiences in the area. The 2010 summer camp, for

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 96

example, had six weeks of activities for children up to 10 years old and included themes as production of natural painting and art works, the transformation of the city into an animal friendly environment, survival techniques in wild locations, identification of plants and animal species, and natural history. Imago also offers summer camps for older children with themes related to arts and eco-adventures (Imago for the Earth 2010).

Residents at the Enright Ridge EcoVillage are encouraged to grow food in their backyards and to participate in the community gardens. A CSA providing 45 weekly shares per year is currently functioning at the EcoVillage and being managed by a professional farmer and interns. The CSA uses the EcoVillage‘s greenhouse and residents‘ backyards as farming land.

The program is open to any person interested in participating regardless being a member or living in the community; participants who offer about one hour of work per week in activities related to the CSA get a discount on the cost of their share.

Figure 31 - The greenhouse used by the CSA and one of the community gardens. Source: Author

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 97

Community living

The Enright Ridge Eco-village is concerned with communicating the happenings in the community to its residents. The group elaborates a quarterly newsletter to update people about the most recent news and projects. Events are also posted in the EcoVillage‘s website (Enright

Ridge Urban Ecovillage 2010). People can also communicate, interact, and strengthen relationships during the monthly meals organized by the EcoVillage and open to all residents of the neighborhood.

The EcoVillage frequently surveys residents about their interests and what they identify as strengths and weaknesses in their neighborhood. Through a process called appreciative inquiry, the EcoVillage directors are able to recognize what people liked most about the area along Enright Avenue and they would like to see more. The use of these inquiry techniques resulted in the establishment of four priorities for the neighborhood: to improve the image of the street, to create a walking trail, to have more shared meals, and to improve relationships between adults and children.

The philosophical framework sustained by members of the EcoVillage is centered in the natural environment, which human beings are a part of as other species are. The envisioners hold the idea of Earth and people as sacred: ―our idea was to look at how we would live if we held the

Earth and its people as sacred, and offer workshops and conferences about sustainability‖

(Schenk 2005, 53). The economical aspect of society is considered with certain contempt: ―It has been a misconception that humans were created for and economic system of production and consumption. The reality of our existence is that we are simply a part of the larger system of

Earth, and economics is just one of the things that we humans do.‖ (Reidel 2008, 55). EcoVillage living is about committing to a simpler way of life, holding a smaller environmental footprint,

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 98

and being more independent from the fluctuations of society. ―In an ecovillage residents take responsibility for their own energy sources, food, and general well-being‖ (Reidel 2008, 55). The most important accomplishments of the Enright Ridge Eco-village are to make the neighborhood safer, a more beautiful place to live, and to offer people a chance to live more fulfilling lives.

Summary

Enright Ridge Eco-village‘s main strategies, according to the Matrix of Sustainable

Measures are:

 Strengthen the community by connecting place with people  Have an urban character and be connected to an urban area  Attribute adequate value to natural resources  Increase efficiency and reduce waste

Similarly to the three other communities studied in this thesis, Enright Ridge Eco-village has a strong commitment to enhancing the sense of community in its neighborhood. The

EcoVillage, together with Imago for the Earth, promotes several social and educational events, many of which are open to the general public. An issue of urban EcoVillages is the lack of open spaces and outdoor recreation options available in cities. On the contrary, Enright has privileged access to Imago‘s natural preserve and residents can have intense contact with nature.

Environmental education programs take advantage of the natural preserve space.

Being located in a pre-existing neighborhood is a great advantage for the Enright Ridge

EcoVillage, because little investment was necessary to start the community. Envisioners encountered a group of current residents interested on starting an EcoVillage and immediately

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 99

founded the organization. Virtually, any community can follow Enright Ridge‘s lessons and become an EcoVillage.

Enright Ridge also attributes high value to natural resources. Non-toxic materials are used in the rehabilitation of houses. The community also contributes for reducing the amount of water that leaves the site in storm events through stormwater management practices.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 100

Comparative Matrix

The comparative matrix was formulated through a brainstorming process and after the completion of the literature review and case studies. Sustainability measures are divided into focus areas, e.g. energy and materials, sense of community, and local economy. These focus areas are classified as predominately social, environmental, or economic, although some measures apply to two or more of these criteria. This table intends to be comprehensive but is not a complete list of sustainability initiatives.

Data collection for completing the matrix was based on literature, field observations, and inquiry of residents. The matrix was completed under the researcher‘s best knowledge of the strategies that are applied in each community. It may not be completely correct and important strategies may be missing. The researcher appreciates feedback from community members and other researchers in order to complete the matrix in the best way possible.

Two dots represent widely applied strategies. One dot represents strategies that are applied to some extent. A line represents that this strategy is not applied in this community. N/A represents that this strategy is not applicable/valuable for this community. A blank space represents that the researcher does not know whether this strategy is applied on this community.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 101

Los Enright Village EcoVillage Angeles Sustainable Measures Ridge Homes at Ithaca Eco- EcoVillage Dimension Strategy Objectives Village

decade of establishment 1970s 1990s 1990s 2000s visioning sessions   design charrettes  Develop and  implement a bought property     shared vision received property as donation -- --   restricted to members ------

faith based ------autonomy over local resources   --

Provide for local collaboration with/influence over local government    self-governance

community meetings for decision making    

use of indicators to measure trends or success -- Social common areas and facilities     physical environment encourages social interaction     encourage outdoor and ecological recreation    

community events     Strengthen the community by common meals     connecting place public art     with people online activity     diversity of age     diversity of income    

diversity of races    

integration with surroundings  --   higher density  --   discouragement of automobile use     Have an urban mixed-use     character and be connected to an connection to public transit     urban area car share program --   

carpool program --    incentives to walking    

incentives to biking    

Environmental ecosystem conservation and restoration programs     Restore natural ecosystems permaculture --    support diversity of species 

Provide water reuse systems --   infrastructure with water efficient appliances   net zero environmental drought resistant landscaping     impact local water treatment systems  

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 102

green roofs  raingardens   bioswales   stormwater pond solar energy    wind energy

geothermal solar water heating   local energy production contributes for the grid   energy efficient furnaces  N/A  heat recovery systems natural ventilation 

high insulation   N/A  agricultural land   -- 

Consume or Community Supported Agriculture     provide local food community gardens    

edible landscape     reduce consumerism    Attribute support policies for resource conservation   adequate value to natural resources measures to control pollution 

use of non-toxic materials  office/work space available    residents work in the community    local retail    

Support the local affordability  --  

c economy availability of rental units   

educational programs     Economi partnership with universities  

partnership with local government    waste reduction initiatives     composting initiatives    

Increase efficiency reuse of waste materials     and reduce waste use of local construction materials    recycling programs    

leasing instead of owning  

Key:  widely applied  applied to some extent -- not applied not known NA not applicable

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 103

Overall observations

The comparative matrix of sustainable measures provides hints about the most recurrent strategies in the communities studied. The most common strategy applied is Strengthen the community by connecting place with people, followed by Consume or provide local food, and

Have an urban character and be connected to an urban area. Among strategies that are not extensively applied, or were not noticed to be very recurrent by the researcher, were Develop and implement a shared vision, and Attribute adequate value to natural resources.

Social dimension

Among the communities studied, those which have a visioning process that closely relates to the best practices presented in the literature review are the EcoVillage at Ithaca and the

Enright Ridge EcoVillage. It was also observed that none of the communities has restricted membership or is faith-based, which are sometimes characteristic of intentional communities.

Provide for local self-governance is applied somewhat frequently in the case studies. However, none of the communities studied used indicators to systematically measure trends or success, and guide decision-making. All of the communities Provide for local self-governance by having meetings and using conflict resolution for decision-making.

The analysis of the Matrix of Sustainable Measures reveals that all communities studied give emphasis to building a strong sense of community. This concentration on creating opportunities for social interaction and establishing a supportive social environment is a universal characteristic of intentional communities. Most communities have common meals, which are a traditional initiative of intentional communities to regularly gather residents and support social diversity. Common facilities, recreational spaces, and community events are

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 104

widely used as ways to establish and maintain connections among residents. Regarding the provision of common facilities, Urban EcoVillages have the disadvantage of being located in an already built environment, which is not necessarily designed to provide opportunities for social interaction or even for safe pedestrian circulation. Urban ecovillages need to advance creative ways of shaping the existing physical conditions of their surroundings to support the sense of community. The Los Angeles EcoVillage residents painted the street surface at the intersection of Bimini and White House Place in an attempt to gain ownership and claim an identity for that space. On weekends, residents have breakfast in the street and traffic is not allowed through

Bimini Place. The Los Angeles EcoVillage is currently negotiating with the city for permanently prohibiting the through-circulation of vehicles in Bimini Place.

Environmental dimension

The selection of case studies took into consideration urban location as an important criterion, thus Have an urban character and be connected to an urban area was a widely applied strategy. Most communities studied present the objectives related to urban areas such as higher density, connection to public transportation, mixed-use, , and integration with the surrounding urban fabric. Because of its suburban location, the EcoVillage at Ithaca applies the least of the objectives presented, but is still in proximity and connected to downtown Ithaca via public transportation.

Because EcoVillages are committed to stewardship towards the natural environment, all of the communities studied demonstrate efforts to Restore natural ecosystems. Permaculture is a recurring initiative of EcoVillages to restore soil and improve overall quality of ecosystems.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 105

There are 17 objectives presented in the matrix that refer to Provide infrastructure with net zero environmental impact. All communities dedicate great efforts to provide low impact infrastructure and employ between 29 and 47 percent of the alternatives listed in the matrix according to their climatic and land use conditions. Communities located in colder regions make use of passive solar design and high insulation to conserve heat. Drought resistant landscaping is another common way to reduce water consumption. Strategies for low environmental impact can be more easily applied in communities built from scratch, as Village Homes and the EcoVillage at Ithaca. Urban EcoVillages struggle to become more energy and resource efficient and to apply new technologies to existing structures.

All of the communities studied apply objectives under Consume or provide local food.

Community gardens, edible landscapes, and Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs are the main initiatives to provide local food to residents. The Los Angeles Ecovillage has the disadvantage of being located in a very dense urban environment and, thus, has limited land that can be used for agriculture. Nevertheless, all land available at the EcoVillage is used for cultivating food and herbs, or for composting.

Economic dimension

Objectives under Attribute adequate value to natural resources were harder to identify in the communities studied. However, the Enright Ridge EcoVillage is a community in which all of the objectives were identified. This group is committed to reducing consumerism, supporting policies for environmental conservation, and reducing pollution. Rehabilitation of buildings is done using non-toxic materials.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 106

One of the most frequently applied strategies to the communities studied is Increase efficiency and reduce waste. All case studies presented initiatives to conserve financial, material, and energy resources.

All of the objectives under Support the local economy are somehow applied in the communities studied. Most communities provide space for residents to work on-site and support businesses in the surrounding community. By providing affordable housing and rental units, most communities encourage diversity and attract new residents who stimulate the local economy. Moreover, the lower proportion of the income spent in housing, the higher proportion of income can be spent in local businesses. Finally, most EcoVillage communities partner with local institutions and governments, which often results in access to additional resources and improvements.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 107

Chapter IV: Recommendations

This literature review and case studies show that EcoVillages represent an opposition or discontentment with mainstream society. Among the most recurrent issues that EcoVillages intend to address are social disconnection, high environmental impact of our lifestyles, and lack of interaction with nature. Based on the findings of this research it is possible to present recommendations to communities that intend to become more sustainable:

1) Formulate a strong vision: A community vision can be based on theoretical principles of sustainable and quality living, as the ones provided in the literature review chapter. There are numerous authors writing on the expanding field of sustainable communities and, therefore, many ideas to base a community vision on. A vision also requires large amount of future residents input and the understanding of existing conditions of the environment where the community will be located. Urban communities do not eliminate the need for the thorough process of formulating a vision. Even if a community is already physically established and design is unnecessary, it is important to establish goals and strategies and to draw a plan of action for achieving those goals.

2) Be located in an urban area: Despite some disadvantages urban EcoVillages might have when compared to suburban and rural communities – limited amount of land for agriculture and recreation, for example – being located in an urban area is one of the most important factors for the sustainability of a community. American cities need restoration and re-urbanization efforts to counter balance the intense experienced after World War II. The vast majority of authors writing about sustainable design agree on the severe social, environmental,

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 108

and economic negative effects of sprawl in our society. Urban EcoVillages provide action for improving blighted and socially distressed urban neighborhoods and increasing livability.

Environmental benefits of being located in an urban area include a) the use of existing infrastructure, and consequent savings on materials and energy to build services from scratch, b) energy savings from reduced need for mobility due to proximity to work, retail, services, and recreation provided in an urban area, c) reduced due to the use of public transit and other alternative means of transportation for commuting, d) preservation of existing agricultural and natural habitat land by establishing a community in an area already built.

3) Consider implementing the cohousing model: The clustered nature of cohousing and the provision of common facilities result on great environmental and economic benefits such as savings on site and residential space, energy, resources, and consumption of goods. Cohousing also fosters intense interaction among people and allows more opportunities for sharing and cooperating, all of which are important goals of intentional communities. Participation in the decision making process is another benefit of cohousing. Nevertheless, the cohousing model needs to be carefully considered, since it is not suitable for all types of people. Many people may not realize the amount of energy and social/political effort required to live in such a community.

4) Maximize the use of renewable energies, in special solar energy: We live in a planet with finite resources, which makes the use of non-renewable energy sources unsustainable in a long term. There is a trend for expanding the use of renewable energies for environmental and economic reasons. Solar energy is the barest form of energy we have access to and the only energetic input our planet receives. Communities need to make extensive use of solar energy and support the development of new technologies that will replace non-renewable energies.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 109

5) Use natural drainage systems: Open natural drainage systems offer multiple benefits on economic, environmental, and social aspects. Natural drainage renders savings on energy and material resources spent on infrastructure construction. Furthermore, natural drainage systems maximize water filtration through the soil, improving water quality of reservoirs, and reduce stormwater runoff out of the site, a major problem in urban areas. Finally, natural drainage systems provide people with knowledge of the water cycle and open spaces aimed for drainage may also be used as a space for recreation.

6) Participate on a network of intentional communities: Grassroots initiatives often rely on peer support to continue. It is important for communities to share their experiences and learn from the experiences of other groups of intentional communities.

Limitations of EcoVillages as a model for other communities

EcoVillage type of communities also present some limitations:

a) Oftentimes, these small grassroots groups have limited resources for implementing new technologies or making general improvements to their physical setting.

b) Because EcoVillages are small groups, they usually have limited representation on local governments.

c) Decision making in EcoVillages may be stressful and time consuming and usually involves conflict resolution. This model of living might not be suitable for everyone.

Communities need to provide alternatives for residents who opt for a lower degree of participation.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 110

d) EcoVillages are usually fueled by a strong leadership or an energetic figure. The dependence on such person or group of people might cause the community to disintegrate after this figure leaves his/her leadership role.

e) Intentional communities are formed from a discontentment with mainstream society.

The choice of living a different life-style might create isolation of intentional communities and

EcoVillages. This may result on a disconnection between EcoVillages and other neighborhoods.

Limitations of this study and recommendations for future study

This thesis presents an overview analysis of the set of strategies applied by selected

EcoVillages. Further study might concentrate on specific aspects of these communities in order to acquire more critical knowledge. Governance, financial aspects, and the use of indicators are examples of aspects that had not been sufficiently reported in this thesis for reasons of length, time, and scope, and would be worth analyzing in order to provide detailed best practices for aspiring sustainable communities.

Urban intentional communities that are ecologically oriented tend to become more common in the future. A future study could search more thoroughly other existing or forming urban EcoVillages, and describe their experiences.

The need for a paradigm shift

As discussed in the introductory chapter, the most recurrent definition of sustainability in literature and media is the one provided by the Brundtland Report (World Commission on

Environment and Development 1987): meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This definition receives two main types

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 111

of criticism by other authors. It is ambiguous, since it is virtually impossible to define our present needs given the difficulty to determine what is really necessary and what is superfluous, and the varying needs of different communities worldwide. Moreover, it is not possible to determine what will be the needs of future generations and how not to compromise them. Another recurrent criticism to this definition of sustainable development is that it is technocratic and does not question the current structures of power. Economic development and technological advances might be interpreted as the solution to inequality among people and nations and to environmental problems. This paradigm might have worked in the past: ―while morally bankrupt, this ‗solution‘

[perpetual economic growth] to social inequity posed no physical threat to society as long as the economy was small relative to the scale of the ecosphere.‖ (Rees 1998, 24) However, in our current society of globalization and high consumption, this model does not work anymore.

The traditional way of understanding economy plays a fundamental role in neglecting the importance of natural resources. ―Industrial society perceives the human enterprise as dominant over and essentially independent of nature‖ (Rees 1998). The environment is understood as a source of resources and a sink for wastes generated by economic activities, while economic processes are understood as a self-sustaining cycle based on production and consumption. On the contrary, the awareness that economy is inserted and wholly dependent of natural systems points to an alternative understanding of economy. Rees proposes the understanding of economy under the second law of thermodynamics in which ―every material transformation, available energy and matter are continuously and irreversibly degraded to the unavailable state.‖ (Rees 1998)

Based on that idea, sustainable development – or sustainable economy – would be the development that minimizes the increase in net global entropy, or even the development that reduces total entropy in the ecosphere. Natural systems have a limited production rate based on

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 112

available nutrients (natural capital) and solar energy. McHarg states the necessity of realizing the inventory of matter, life forms, apperceptive powers, roles, fitness, adaptations, symbioses and genetic potential that are the natural capital, in an ―ecological value system in which the currency is energy‖ (McHarg 1969, 197). Consumption optimally involves the employment of energy in the raising of levels of matter, which is not consumed but merely cycled. A sustainable economy needs to live in the ―interest‖ generated by natural capital, and limit the consumption of capital stocks. By maintaining and increasing stocks of natural capital we can ensure the integrity of the ecosphere and, only then, that the needs of future generations will be met.

This realization of the misguided understanding of the importance and capital value of natural resources is similar to the approach that Hawken, Lovins, and Lovins present in the book

Natural (Hawken, Lovins, and Lovins 1999). The authors describe a set of alternatives to maintain current life quality standards in a sustainable way through an economic oriented and objective position. The concept of ‖natural capital‖ refers to Earth‘s resources and ecosystems, both of which play a fundamental role in the regulation of natural processes and are difficult and costly to reproduce. Natural capital is limited and finite, and must be used sparingly to allow future generations to use these resources. The solutions presented by Natural Capitalism are rather conciliatory, relying on adaptations to our current life styles and proposing a higher valuation of natural resources and ecosystem services.

Despite presenting a new rational approach to the issue of sustainable development, Rees recognizes that, due to the complexity of ecological systems and their relationships, it is not likely that humans will ever be able to precisely quantify the life support functions that constitute the natural capital stock. This inability to estimate the rate in which natural resources recover and the potential disruptions in Earth‘s ecosystems caused by human activity makes these new

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 113

rational models of understanding the natural environment unreliable. As scientific alternatives fail to quantify and predict the availability of natural capital, there is a large number of alternative approaches arising recently that address the issue of sustainable development. Rees remarks as one of the most noteworthy alternative approaches. Bioregionalism aims to teach people how to describe and to live in their bioregion respecting the capacity of natural system to support human life. Bioregionalism concentrates in the small scaled area where people spend most of their time. By experiencing environmental issues on practice, people can recognize and understand them, taking charge for natural resources maintenance and pride for the visibility of their actions.

Williamson, Radford, and Bennetts discuss the validity of universal procedures and guidelines for and urban environments in Understanding Sustainable

Architecture (Williamson, Radford, and Bennetts 2003). The authors support local design and decision making as best approaches to achieve more sustainable environments. After analyzing mainstream frameworks of performance evaluation and identifying their flaws, the authors state that universal principles fail to consider ―differences between peoples‘ preferences and expectations, their culture and society in the prevailing economic circumstances and capabilities‖

(Williamson, Radford, and Bennetts 2003, 75). A more comprehensive approach to sustainability necessarily includes sensitivity to culture, resources and character of the place.

Ian McHarg states in Design with Nature that the problem of man and nature consists in the ―necessity of sustaining nature as source of life, milieu, teacher, sanctum, challenge and, most of all, of rediscovering nature‘s corollary of the unknown in the self, the source of meaning.‖ (McHarg 1969, 19). This understanding of the relationship between humans and nature is also expressed by more spiritual oriented movements – deep ecology, in example –

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 114

based on profound respect and stewardship of humans towards nature. The basic realization in deep ecology is that humans are a mere part of the natural systems and are entitled with the same right to use the planet‘s resources as any other form of life. More revolutionary and egalitarian approaches to sustainability consider political freedom, social equity, and cooperation as essential as stewardship towards the environment.

Sim Van der Ryn and Stuart Cowan present two distinct visions of sustainability, based on David Orr‘s writings. The first is the technological vision of sustainability, which consists in the policies created to cope or mitigate environmental problems. This vision searches for technological and market-oriented solutions to be implemented by governments and corporations. Technological sustainability fits well into the current structures of power and does not require a paradigm shift in our society. The second vision of sustainability is the ecological vision, which consists in finding alternatives to practices that are harmful to the environment and emerges from grassroots groups. Among the key aspects of ecological sustainability are: rethinking our current practices on agriculture, energy, housing, transportation, realizing the limits to material needs and use of natural resources, and recognizing the complexity of natural systems. According to David Orr, because people are finite and fallible, we cannot fully understand the complex natural systems. Nevertheless, nature‘s billions of years of evolution provide the best model for all design problems we face. The strategy proposed by Van der Ryn and Cowan is to adopt nature‘s solutions to design problems.

Many authors affirm that true sustainability can only be achieved through a radical shift in our lifestyles and our ways of understanding our role in relationship to other beings and the natural systems. Sustainability ―is more than saving a few acres of the habitat of an endangered species, or requiring a few ‗best management practices‘ to abate non-point-source pollution.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 115

Rather, it represents a basic shift in philosophy‖ (Beatley 1998, 356, 247-8). Fritjof Capra attributes the causes of the global environmental crisis to the dominant paradigm that traces back to the Cartesian rationalism. This framework understands the universe as a mechanical system composed by simple pieces, which can be analyzed and understood separately providing a complete understanding of the whole system. As a result of this way of thinking nature is considered to be understood and dominated, being a mere service for human economic and technological growth. Progress is achieved through economic growth and maximization of production, which consistently mean undervaluation, overexploitation, and destruction of the natural systems.

Robert Thayer shares a similar understanding of how philosophical systems have detached humans from nature. The most primitive and genuinely human existence was in the form of highly cooperative social bands. As tools developed and social structure evolved to be in accordance with complex technologies, the nature of thought itself changed, causing the individual consciousness to fragment into two. One part consists of the ―self‖ as the individual who observes and experiences reality; the other part is the general representation of society and all ―externalities‖ as the environment, and other people. This division of consciousness into distinct observer and observed components and the Western notion of a ―self‖ independent of the

―environment‖ are in the core of the environmental/ technological dilemma. Considering the

―self‖ as separate from the context is considered the major cause of increasing social and environmental violence, since ―separation of the self from the context is an easy escape from responsibility.‖ (Thayer 1994, 97)

In order to overcome the current crisis Capra proposes the adoption of a new paradigm based in a holistic worldview that emphasize the singular qualities of the whole rather than its

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 116

separate parts. This paradigm assumes the complexity of living systems and considers their most important characteristic the structure that arises from the interaction and interdependence of its parts. That implies the acceptance of a limited comprehension of each single aspect involved in these relationships and the need to preserve existing connections of natural systems. Capra is a supporter of the deep ecology philosophy, which considers humans as a part of nature, rather than its proprietors. This paradigm shift can only be achieved by attributing value to all living nature systems and understanding human beings as connected through and matter to these systems.

Many grassroots sustainable communities have been founded in a vision that is based in the set of principles of deep ecology and living systems theory. A strong philosophical framework shared by members of the community is important to maintain unity and to continue to struggle towards more sustainable ways of living. These more ―unscientific‖ approaches permeate the vision of the case studies analyzed in this thesis. They focus on building social relations, cooperation, participation on decision making, limiting human needs. Alternatives for ecological infrastructure are experimentations that follow from that rooted initial vision. The sustainability of these groups is not solely based on quantification or in the adoption of these criteria but in the process of building and maintaining social relationships that lead to a stronger connection to the natural environment.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 117

Bibliography

Arkin, Lois. 1992. "The Los Angeles Eco Village: A Sustainable Urban Community." In Sustainable Cities: Concepts and Strategies for Eco-City Development, edited by Bob Walter, Lois Arkin and Richard W. Crenshaw. Los Angeles: Eco-Home Media.

Bainbridge, David A., Judy Corbett, and John Hofacre. 1979. Village Homes' Solar House Designs: A Collection of 43 Energy-Conscious House Designs. Emmaus, Pa.: Rodale Press.

Bang, Jan Martin. 2005. Ecovillages: A Practical Guide to Sustainable Communities. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society.

Beatley, Timothy. 2009. Tim Beatley: Lessons from the LA Ecovillage.

———. 1998. "The Vision of Sustainable Communities." In Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-use Planning for Sustainable Communities, 356. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press.

Beatley, Timothy and Peter Newman. 2009. Down Under: Learning from Sustainable Communities in Australia. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Benevolo, Leonardo. 1980. The [Storia della città.English]. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.

Capra, Fritjof. 1994. "Deep Ecology: A New Paradigm." In Deep Ecology for the Twenty-First Century, edited by George Sessions. 1st ed. Boston: Shambhala.

Christian, Diana Leafe. 2003. Creating a Life Together. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

Cooperative Resources and Services Project. "Los Angeles Eco-Village: Demonstrating Higher Quality Living Patterns at a Lower Environmental Impact." , accessed May, 2010, http://laecovillage.org/.

Corbett, Judy and Michael N. Corbett. 2000. Designing Sustainable Communities: Learning from Village Homes. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Daly, Herman E. 2005. "Economics in a Full World." Scientific American 293 (3): 100.

Dawson, Jonathan. 2006. Ecovillages: New Frontiers for Sustainability. Schumacher Briefing. Vol. 12. White River Junction, Vt.: Published on behalf of the Schumacher Society by Chelsea Green Pub. Co.

EcoVillage at Ithaca. "EcoVillage at Ithaca." , accessed April, 2010, http://ecovillageithaca.org/evi/.

Enright Ridge Urban Ecovillage. "Enright Ridge Urban Ecovillage." , accessed May, 2010, http://enrightecovillage.org/.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 118

Envisioning a Post-Carbon City. "Resilience in Action: EcoVillage at Ithaca." Envisioning a Post-Carbon City, accessed October 28, 2011, http://envisionpcc.blogspot.com/2011/04/resilience-in-action- ecovillage-at.html.

Farr, Douglas. 2008. : Urban Design with Nature. A Wiley Book on Sustainable Design. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Fellowship for Intentional Community. "Intentional Communities." , http://www.ic.org/.

Fischetti, Diana Michelle. 2008. "Building Resistance from Home: Ecovillage at Ithaca as a Model of Sustainable Living." Master of Arts, University of Oregon.

Francis, Mark. 2003. Village Homes: A Community by Design. Case Study in Land and Community Design. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Gavron, Daniel. 2000. The Kibbutz: Awakening from Utopia. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.

GEN. "Global Ecovillage Network." 2010, http://gen.ecovillage.org.

Hamm, Bernd, P. K. Muttagi, Universität Trier, and Unesco. 1998. Sustainable Development and the Future of Cities. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Hawken, Paul. 2010. The Ecology of Commerce: A Declaration of Sustainability. Rev ed. New York, NY: Harper Business.

Hawken, Paul, Amory B. Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins. 1999. Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution. 1st ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.

Imago for the Earth. "Imago for the Earth." , accessed May, 2010, http://www.imagoearth.org/index.html.

Jackson, Hildur and Karen Svensson. 2002. Ecovillage Living: Restoring the Earth and Her People. Foxhole, Dartington, Devon: Green Books.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1972. Commitment and Community; Communes and Utopias in Sociological Perspective. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Keiner, Marco, Barbara Schultz, and Willy A. Schmid. 2004. "Measuring Sustainability and Quality-of-Life in the City of Zurich." In Community Quality-of-Life Indicators: Best Cases, edited by M. Joseph Sirgy, Don R. Rahtz and Tong-jin Yi. Vol. 22, 234. Dordrecht; Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

LAEV Gardeners. "LA Eco-Village Gardeners' Weblog: Urban Food Comes Alive." , accessed May, 2010, http://laevgarden.wordpress.com/.

Los Angeles Eco-Village. "Los Angeles Eco-Village Wiki." , accessed May, 2010, http://urbansoil.net/wiki.cgi.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 119

———. "L.A. Eco-Village Blog: Reinventing how we Live in the City." , accessed May, 2010.

McHarg, Ian L. 1969. Design with Nature. New York: J. Wiley.

McLaughlin, Andrew. 1994. "The Heart of Deep Ecology." In Deep Ecology for the Twenty-First Century, edited by George Sessions. 1st ed. Boston: Shambhala.

Miles, Malcolm. 2008. Urban Utopias: The Built and Social of Alternative Settlements. London; New York: Routledge.

Munro, David A. 1991. Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living. Gland, Switzerland: published in partnership by IUCN, UNEP, WWF.

Naess, Arne. 1994. "The Deep Ecological Movement." In Deep Ecology for the Twenty-First Century, edited by George Sessions. 1st ed. Boston: Shambhala.

Rees, William E. 1998. "Understanding Sustainable Development." In Sustainable Development and the Future of Cities, edited by Bernd Hamm and P. K. Muttagi. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Rees, William E. and Mark Roseland. 1998. "Sustainable Communities: Planning for the 21st Century." In Sustainable Development and the Future of Cities, edited by Bernd Hamm and P. K. Muttagi. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Reidel, Kate. 2008. "Ecologically Speaking Communities: Enright Ridge Urban Eco-Village." Communities Magazine 141: 55.

Roseland, Mark. 2001. "The Eco-City Approach to Sustainable Development in Urban Areas." In How Green is the City?: Sustainability Assessment and the Management of Urban Environments, edited by Dimitri Devuyst, Luc Hens and W. de Lannoy, 85. New York: Columbia University Press.

Roseland, Mark, Maureen Cureton, and Heather Wornell. 1998. Toward Sustainable Communities: Resources for Citizens and their Governments. Rev a updat ed. Gabriola Island, BC; New Haven, CT: New Society Publishers.

Ruano, Miguel. 1999. Ecourbanism, Sustainable Human Settlements: 60 Case Studies. AD+E, Arquitectura y Diseño + Ecología. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.

Schenk, Jim. 2005. "A Home Grown Ecovillage." Communities Magazine, 52.

Sustainable Seattle. "B-Sustainable: Information ." , accessed March 27, 2011, www.b-sustainable.org.

Thayer, Robert L. 1994. Gray World, Green Heart: Technology, Nature, and Sustainability in the Landscape. New York: Wiley.

———. 2011. Interview by Leila Loezer. Village Homes: September 2nd, 2011.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 120

———. 2003. LifePlace: Bioregional Thought and Practice. Berkeley: University of California Press.

The Biomimicry Institute. "Biomimicry Institute." The Biomimicry Institute, accessed October 27, 2011, http://biomimicryinstitute.org/.

Todd, Nancy Jack and John Todd. 1994. From Eco-Cities to Living Machines: Principles of Ecological Design. Berkeley, Calif: North Atlantic Books.

Tyler Norris Associates, Redefining Progress, and Sustainable Seattle. 1997. The Community Indicators Handbook: Measuring Progress Toward Healthy and Sustainable Communities. San Francisco, Calif: Redefining Progress.

University of Cincinnati. 1999. Seminary Square Eco-Village Work Plan. Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati.

Van der Ryn, Sim and Stuart Cowan. 2007. Ecological Design. 10th anniversary ed. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Walker, Liz. 2005. EcoVillage at Ithaca: Pioneering a Sustainable Culture. Gabriola, BC: New Society Publishers.

Williamson, T. J., Anthony Radford, and Helen Bennetts. 2003. Understanding Sustainable Architecture. London; New York: Spon Press.

World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford Paperbacks. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Leila B Loezer MSArch Thesis 121