Seeing Our Blind Spots: Addressing Racism and Working for Racial Equity: A workshop presented by Joe Cole on May 25, 2019

As much as I have studied racism in the United States, both its history and its very present effects on our day-to-day lives…and also as I have learned how White people rarely know the frequency with which Black people and other people of color are affected by past and present racism…and, also how White people themselves are affected…as much as I have studied all of this, I am aware of how much I still have to learn. 

Joe Cole offered a comprehensive and stunning workshop as a part of our Last Saturday series, sponsored by the Membership & Marketing Circle.  (For Joe’s handouts, click here)

From Housing Development Consortium

Here are a few highlights:

• There was the early history lesson about how the language of “Black” and “White” was created in the 1600s-1700s, largely to create disunity among all the poor people of both groups in America.
• Then there was the more recent history lesson which explained how the GI Bill, Social Security, and federal lending practices in the 1950s and beyond worked to sharply increase the wealth gap between White people and other populations living in the U.S.  Similar practices continue today through the overuse of standardized testing, under-funding of schools that serve communities of color and lower-income communities, inequities as to who receives health and retirement benefits, and unfair lending practices regarding home mortgages and small businesses.
• Then there was the truth that things are not getting better, in fact, they are getting worse.  For example, the median White income is TWELVE times that of the median Black income.  Young Black children are being suspended at almost 4 times the rate of young White children, and, of course, we are well aware of the danger of “driving while Black”. 

From Learning to Lead for Racial Equity

The sizeable group at Hart’s Nest shared personal experiences and awareness of racism, feelings of caring deeply about racism and its power to create harm.  Joe shared many handouts to help us examine how segregated our lives are currently and how we might want to change that; how to think more deeply about microaggressions to avoid committing them; and how to think about the questions we sometimes have (that we don’t want to admit to) such as feelings associated with White privilege, including guilt, discomfort with being White, and difficulty recognizing the parts of “White identity” that we might carry (okay, that one is me!). 

From the Gaia Institute

And there was a lot of information about the connections between racism and sustainability, and how important it is to be aware of racism so as to create a socially just and fully sustainable community.  Head’s up, Hart’s Mill–this means US! 

People appreciated the pacing and varied activities of the 3-hour session, which began with a meditation to help us relax and focus.  After a break we did some Chi Gung to help engage with our energy.   The opportunity to hear each other’s stories about racism and the possibilities beyond racism was a favorite.  These stories were sometimes heart-wrenching, sometimes hopeful, and all were compelling examples of how significantly all of our lives have been influenced by racism.   The many gems and resources Joe offered to help us to understand racism and privilege, as well as how to organize to effect change within ourselves, our community, and the world, were greatly appreciated by all. 

For sure, many of us will continue these conversations further in small groups; we will brainstorm ways to incorporate the themes of social, racial, and environmental justice in our community; and we will be sharing with you our thoughts and ideas.  Please be in touch with what’s on your mind about racism, what you’d like to see happening at Hart’s Mill, and what you can offer.  We’re all ears!

Remember, childcare is available for all of our meetings and events upon request!

Workshop 1 Activity and Outcomes*

We had an exciting time at Hart’s Nest on November 17-18 exploring and applying a development and design process called regenerative development. The aim was to discover how regenerative development might add to and enhance the work of Hart’s Mill.  Many thanks to Hope, Joe, Katy, Maria, Marilyn, Paul, and Randy for participating. 

We began the process by discussing what participants love about Hart’s Mill.  Participants love the human relationships, social and economic ideal, organizational structure, generosity, desire to transform themselves and the world, creativity, persistence, the well-defined common values and principles, opportunity for innovation, and willingness to take leadership roles and responsibility. They also love the beauty of the land, its water, its diversity of life, its gifts (like edible mushrooms), and the opportunity to become intimate with place.

I then introduced the concept of regenerative development. I explained that regenerative development is a system of methodologies that develops capacities in living systems to continually evolve to higher levels of health and well-being, from the scale of individuals to sites, neighborhoods, cities, and beyond. Regenerative development is different from other approaches in several ways. It shifts us from:

• Focusing on problems to manifesting potential
• Working with parts to working with wholes
• Static ‘solutions’ to growing capacities
• Scarcity to abundance
• Addressing symptoms to addressing causes—worldviews and consciousness
• A parasitic to a mutualistic relationship with nature
• Project-focused to value-adding (i.e., being of service) to the larger context

Regenerative development charts a path for thrivability within which more specific regenerative and ecological design technologies and strategies may be used. These include biophilia, biomimicry, bioclimatic design, Permaculture, regenerative agriculture, and Living Building and Community Challenges.

I introduced the regenerative community development tools I have developed and am piloting as part of my dissertation research. These are intended to help guide communities through the regenerative development process. These may used throughout time to adjust and adapt concepts, goals, and strategies as contexts and conditions change.

Using the tools to guide us, we dove into exploring what gives life to this place. We looked at the larger communities of which Hart’s Mill is a part as well as at Hart’s Mill itself. At the next largest scale up, Hart’s Mill and adjacent neighbors form a community. At the next largest scale, this context seemed appropriate:

And then this:

We also found thinking about Hart’s Mill as part of the Upper Neuse River Basin helpful. Looking at how all of these scales relate to one another, we explored ecological and social flows, patterns, and relationships that have given, currently give, and could give your community and its surrounding landscape vitality. We looked at elements for life including water, organisms (including people), nutrients, soil, infrastructure, and information, among others. We discovered that west-east flows of humans, commerce, water, and creatures (beavers, coyotes, foxes, turtles, birds) have been and continue to be important. We found that connections, exchanges, and mutually-beneficial relationships amongst these elements are important for vitality.

We discovered the essence of Hart’s Mill—what defines it as a unique whole and gives it life and vitality—and articulated it in a short Story of Place and regenerative development concept:

Hart’s Mill is a connecting place, rooted in rich biological and cultural diversity and flows that bring forth vitality and life. At a time of great social and environmental dysfunction, we are called forth as a catalyst for collaborative transformation. We are an agrarian community of learning, inhabiting, practicing and service committed to healing our relationships to each other and the earth, within Hart’s Mill and as an integral part of our larger community.

This statement can guide regenerative development efforts, connecting past, present, and future from the scale of individuals to the region.

We began exploring potential collaborations and guild relationships. These are relationships within the larger community that would result in mutual benefits for all. Potential members include neighbors, other local communities, Minka Farms, Triangle Land Conservancy, Eno River Association, Orange County Planning Department, City of Mebane, Commission for the Environment, local universities and schools, green developers, Sally Greene (Orange County Commissioner). Participants noted some actions that can be taken right now to generate income and move towards Hart’s Mill’s vision, including on-line teaching and beginning an educational center at Hart’s Nest.

Next, we briefly explored how regenerative development enhances Hart’s Mill’s current approach and thinking. Thoughts included:

• The inclusion of larger contexts and systems; understanding your role within those systems
• Frameworks to guide thinking, discussion, and action in Hart’s Mill and beyond for community members and the professionals who work with you
• A language to communicate who Hart’s Mill is at its heart
• Help looking at the bigger picture

For our next weekend workshop, we intend to evaluate Hart’s Mill’s current principles, vision, and mission using its regenerative development concept and the regenerative community development evaluation tool. We will then use the tool to co-create regenerative development goals and strategies specific to Hart’s Mill. We will then use the tool to discuss how specific design technologies and strategies can help implement regenerative development. We will discuss potential regenerative development indicators for your community. We will also explore your role as regenerative individuals in enabling vitality in Hart’s Mill and beyond.

*If you are a Hart’s Mill member interested in attending Workshop 2 on December 22-23, please contact Hope at hopematrix@fastmail.com

Last Saturday, 28 Hart’s Mill members and friends gathered bravely at Hart’s Nest to talk about the role and meaning of money in the context of our evolving intentional community.

Under the guidance of members of the Hart’s Mill Financial/Legal Circle, presentations and discussions focused on (1) the inner workings of the financial and legal life of both the Hart’s Mill Ecovillage and the Hart’s Mill, LLC (Limited Liability Company), (2) a detailed summary of where our money comes from and how it’s responsibly spent, (3) how these topics relate to our anticipated home ownership model – a limited-equity housing cooperative 

model, and (4) avenues for Hart’s Mill members to deepen their involvement with the community, including how they can become part-owners of the project by investing in the Hart’s Mill, LLC.  To see the presentation slides, click here.

A closing “commitment round” resulted in generous pledges of more than one-third of our $150K predevelopment fund-raising goal.  What a wonderful afternoon!

Included in the discussions were many personal expressions of how the vision and practice of Hart’s Mill calls to our hearts and expresses our values.  In the face of deepening national crises (including diminishing affordable housing, widening income and wealth disparities, shamefully stubborn social, racial, and environmental injustices, urban/rural inequities, and disgracefully broken governmental institutions), Hart’s Mill is resolved, through our farm and community practices, to be an agent in moving forward an agenda of deep and meaningful cultural change.

How we organize our financial and legal affairs is but one piece of a larger agenda of voluntary joyful community life as we do our small bit to meaningfully address issues from the personal to the planetary.

The Planning, Design, and Development (PDD) Circle’s Spring design priority is to achieve a village design that is workable both architecturally and financially, and so appealing and functional that it will earn ready assent from current members and can help us effectively (and quickly) inspire and recruit new members. This design will have to be co-developed alongside detailed site engineering, financial planning, etc. but we think the actual, visualizable house plans will be the dramatic next step.

We are currently moving toward this goal in a variety of ways. This post outlines the main ones, but can only touch the high points. All members are invited to find out more when PDD hosts April’s “Last Saturday” event at Hart’s Nest, on Saturday 28 April, 3-6pm. Everything discussed in this post will be laid out and explained in detail, with ample time for questions and discussion too. We’ll have some specific questions for the community as well, as we tune   the new models to members’ wishes and interests. Please mark this event on your calendars and make it a point to come!

“Building Blocks”

Katy, Paul, Donna, and Anthony road-tripped to Atlanta in early March for an extended consultation with Greg Ramsey and associates at Village Habitat Design (we also toured the plant of a potential construction partner on the way). Greg and his partner Dennis McConnell sparked a major re-conception of the design program of the community

Our zoning provides for 32 units. We’d been assuming that we’d mostly be building a few kinds of houses, each basically a Single Family Dwelling Unit (that’s a zoning category), adaptable for individuals, couples, or families with a few kids and maybe a renter in an upstairs bedroom. We were planning one or two shared homes as well.

Greg and Dennis introduced an entirely new element. Suites are semi-independent units linked  to a house with a door (with a lock) and with an external entrance as well, fully equipped as a small apartment (1 or 2 BR plus bath, sitting area, and “wet bar”: a small kitchen without a stove (but microwave is OK). The key thing is that a house with several such suites still counts as a Single Family Dwelling Unit. Thus we can still build 32 units, all officially Single Family Dwelling Units, but at the same time significantly increases both the number and the variety of living situations we can offer to members.

Katy worked out a luminous visual presentation of the basic idea which she presented to a March joint meeting of PDD and Finance/Legal Circles. These slides are a quick illustration. (Please realize that the hexagons are just c0nceptual.  The actual houses are not likely to be hexagonal!)

Achitecture

We need to do a variety of consultations with the County and with potential funders to be sure that this “Building Bock” schematic design meets legal and financial requirements. The key work, though, is to begin to visualize and work it out architecturally. How will the homes actually lay out and what will they look like?

To help answer this question we are bringing an architect on board: Jonathan Lucas, of What on Earth Architecture in Asheville, http://www.whatoneartharchitecture.com/  We have been in conversation with Jonathan for several years – his style promises a very good working fit with our own – and he has experience with cohousing design as well as a wide range of other projects. Jonathan can offer both floor plans and perspective drawings and also 3D visualizations, energy-use modelling, and virtual walk-throughs. We have begun consultation with Jonathan by Zoom conference and are setting up a three-way conference between us, him, and Greg Ramsey very soon. He will also be making a visit to the land later in the Spring.

As you can see from Katy’s slides, our new model makes it natural to work with “building blocks”: suites and houses of various sizes, keyed to members’ wishes, combinable in a variety of ways. For economies both in design and construction, we’ll want to work with fairly few “blocks” and maximize the ease with which they can be combined and varied. We do want to note that this we may need to adjust or replace our current Sunslope schematic design. It may not be adaptable enough for the multiple configurations we are now envisi0ning. Still, of course, major design elements from Sunslope will remain, such as the large south-sloping roofs for major photovoltaic panels and fully liveable single-floor options, as well as an attempt to moderate the range of style preferences we have discovered among us.

Construction Methods and Partners

We also continue to research and compare a variety of different construction materials and methods. This search relates closely to architecture, but it is still a separate question since often very similar designs can be realized in a wide variety of materials/methods.

Sustainability, affordability, adaptability, availability are all key desiderata, and the decision is going to require weighing of all of them and probably making some hard choices between them. Also, choosing between construction methods is often to choose between specific firms with whom we might partner, introducing yet another set of considerations. The right partnerships will be crucial!

We have narrowed down the list of alternatives considerably. For example, we are unlikely to choose blown-in foam or rigid styrofoam-type insulation, though it can be used in some highly efficient and affordable panelized forms, because ultimately its very longevity is a disadvantage.  You can’t get rid of it, ever. Many also have off-gassing issues. On the other hand, our current candidates include some intriguing methods and materials, such as hemp-lime mixtures for insulation (possibly also available in panelized forms). We are also considering whether and how far earth-building methods could be an appealing choice for parts of the village, farm, or other buildings. At the same time, we continue to consider traditional stick-building methods, which have significant advantages and can be adapted to our sustainability and other requirements as well.

Other PDD Irons in the Fire

There are many other, related items on PDD’s plate:

• We are revisiting the Affordability question at the same time that we are beginning to get harder and more specific data on likely costs and prices.
• Another big-picture question is how far can/should we welcome multiple styles (designs, construction methods, etc.), and if so, at what scale?
• The Common House also needs to go back on the agenda. We’ve back-burnered the Common House in favor of the residences for a while, but on the Building Block plan, smaller suites presuppose the Common House: it probably will have to be built concurrently after all.

Again, please plan to find out more when PDD hosts April’s “Last Saturday” event at Hart’s Nest, 3-6pm on Saturday 28 April.  All members are welcome!

Saturday, February 24, 3-6 p.m., Hart’s Nest

Spring is coming fast, and the Land Stewardship Circle (LSC) offered an educational presentation to any and all interested folks for the purpose of clarifying its Mission and Aims, tasks going forward, 2018 priorities, 2017 leaps forward.  The gathering was well attended by 17 members and friends:  Anthony, Paul, Hope, Jeffry, Margret, Randy, Rita Joe & daughter Mia, Tain, Marilyn, Virginia, Bailey, Sarah, Allie and Jae, and Earth’s Turn Community member, Doug.

 Jeffry (Operational Leader of LSC) gave a brief overview of the circle’s Domains, Aims, and Priorities.   With the help of Powerpoint and oversized paper copies of our land and farm master plan (created by Bobby Tucker of Bodhi Land and Design), Jeffry explained how Hart’s Mill’s  village, roads, forests, pond, farm-able areas, and more are laid out on the land. 

There are five Domain subdivisions: forest, pond, farm,  infrastructure, and education. This gathering concentrated on the first three.  Here is a brief summary–stay tuned for more!

The Pond (report by Virginia)

It is uncertain how old the pond is, but since we know the dam was made in 1962, it is more than 56 years old. Soundings made from a kayak show the deepest areas to be only around 5’, with most of the rest between 3 and 4’. The sides are too sloped and the edges show much erosion, exposed tree roots, and ingress of storm water run-off from Frazier Road.  In Virginia’s opinion, major work on pond restoration can certainly wait a few years, but she recommends creating a storm water run-off elimination plan soon, as that water is almost surely polluted.

The Forest (report by Randy)

When Hart’s Mill bought the property from Alana Ennis in January of 2017, an excellent  Forest Stewardship Plan was already in place.   Created for us by the Eno River Association in 2013, this report spells out in great detail a plan to keep our forest healthy and to meet the requirements of our Present Use Value (PUV) tax assessment.  Various discrete land parcels are slated for thinning as they mature, and we are already somewhat behind in addressing the first parcel. Randy stressed the need to develop a timeline and to explore creative ways to meet our PUV requirements. Our land also has many burgeoning exotic invasive species (notably Ailanthus, or Tree of Heaven) which need some attention very soon.

The Farm (report by Jeffry and Margret)

Last year, General Circle consented to a Mission and Aims document for the Farm which allowed us to move forward. So far, about ½ acre is dedicated to vegetable production, and other substantial portions of the land are becoming productive in other ways.  Jeffry and Margret, as Seeing Stars Farm (SSF), are currently doing the bulk of the work, paying all expenses, and selling what we grow at a farmer’s market. This benefits both Seeing Stars (financially) and HM (meeting the PUV, beginning soil improvement,  establishing a presence on the land, and involving members to fulfill our mission as an agrarian intentional community).  This arrangement will be revisited periodically, and eventually it will convert to being an all-Hart’s Mill enterprise.

Last year we had some successes (sweet potatoes, white potatoes, cabbage, onions, bok choy) and some failures (tomatoes, peppers), which was not unexpected for a first crop on new soil. Paul was elected to be a liaison person between SSF and HM to ensure transparency and transmit questions and concerns. In our first year we grossed $1,450.00, which is more than needed to qualify for the agriculture portion of the PUV. Hooray!

This year we are planning to have farm work-days, to be scheduled as needs arise. We will have a list of tasks large and small, for anyone interested in helping out. Stay tuned!

Joyful tidings

Two acts of generosity will enable to farm to make significant progress this year: 1) Margret and Jeffry are underwriting the dropping of a WELL on the land. This will happen in early March.  2) An Angel Investor has made a substantial financial contribution to be used to further our farming efforts going forward.  We are so grateful for and uplifted by this support and encourage other Angel Investors to step forward, as the needs are many. 

And the star of the show: The Land

The final portion of the meeting was a walk-and-talk on the land itself. The weather could not have been more cooperative; it was 70, breezy, and sunny. This walk made it possible to point out all the major areas we had addressed—the pond, its dam, tree stands in need of thinning, the general area for village construction, and the current farm activities. Folks had an opportunity to ask questions, some of which we could answer and some of which will need some research. This is the concept of “it takes a village” in action!

We returned to Hart’s Nest feeling nourished and uplifted by the riches of our precious land and devoted community. 

The past few years of political, cultural and social upheaval have challenged me to examine my own thoughts, emotions, language and behaviors around issues of racism, classism, ageism, sexism, and many of the other ‘isms’.   I read, I listened and I engaged mostly with my friends, both in and outside of the HM Community, on these topics .  Gratefully, I found many others were also ready to participate in this dialogue.

I was referred several times over the last few years to an organization called Organizing Against Racism (OAR).  The OAR Alliance is a network of anti-racism groups based in and around the Triangle area.  OAR Alliance offers Racial Equity Institute’s (REI) two-day workshops entitled Phase I and Phase II.  The anti-racism workshops are designed to bring together participants who want to support each other while deepening our understanding of how to be effective anti-racists.   But first, there is a lot to uncover and learn.

Originally, I thought two days seemed like a lot of time to devote to this topic.  After all, I think of myself (a mature, white woman) as a fairly aware individual who likes to delve into topics rather than turn away from those I don’t know much about or understand.   However,  the REI workshop alumni continually reinforced that the time I would invest attending, would be “time well spent”.      

I followed the workshop schedule online for about 6 months wondering when would be best for me to sign up.   I noticed that the ticketed training slots seemed to fill up rather quickly and was encouraged to see that a lot of folks were continually attending.   So in line with my strong intention to know better, do better, be better  (that’s an Oprah quote that I like), in November, I decided to jump in and sign up for the first Phase I workshop of the 2018 New Year.   

Off I went, notebook in hand, on Monday, January 8, ready to immerse myself in this subject matter.  Now that I am an alumni of Phase I, I find it difficult to summarize the two days because it was not at all what I thought it would be.  It was much, much more.

The Racial Equity Workshop Phase I moves the focus from individual bigotry and bias by presenting a thorough historical, cultural, structural and institutional analysis of racial and ethnic disparities.  With a clear understanding of how institutions and systems are producing unjust and inequitable outcomes, participants begin a journey toward social transformation and racial justice.   Even 50 years after significant civil rights’ gains, the impact of race continues to shape the outcomes of all institutions in which we are affiliated.

Our three facilitators were a dynamic team; all with very different perspectives and stories to share.  They were: a 60-year-old African American woman (she told us her age), who was a seasoned REI trainer; a middle-aged, Jewish man with years invested as a community activist; and a mixed-race, male millennial, just starting his career as a facilitator.   They warned us that they would ‘prick’ our collective consciousness over the next two days….and they did.  We would be challenged to examine individual bias, stereotyping, assumptions and unconscious responses we have been conditioned to think, believe and say throughout our lifetime. 

Their expectations of the 48 attendees in the audience were: to get proximate to the issues of race and racism; listen and be open to learning the narrative; commit and engage; be willing to be uncomfortable; recognize there is no quick fix, yet maintain hope in the process. 

By mid morning on the first day, having only heard the opening presentations, I realized this would be my new confession, an examination of conscience.   I used my breath to calm myself throughout the day when participants were asked to consider questions such as:  Why it is important to end racism? How are race and poverty related? How does our present system exploit, exclude and oppress the underserved in healthcare, education and criminal justice system?

After a good nights’ sleep, I reviewed my notes and was ready for day two. Our trainers focused on the disparities within our community institutions, provoking discussions about poverty, class, affirmative action, racial oppression, white privilege, conditioning, neighborhoods and home ownership, to name a few.  I left the two-day workshop exhausted, concerned, in disbelief of my lack of knowledge and awareness …… yet grateful, uplifted, hopeful, and committed to a more extensive study of these topics.     

For anyone interested in attending an REI Workshop, trainings are offered frequently and in a variety of locations in Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill.   The workshop facilitators are highly trained and continually rotate, so there is always an element of surprise in the leadership. 

I was pleased to learn that after completing the training, alumni are invited to come together and participate in monthly caucusing meetings.  It is here that you can continue to dialog with others about how racism lives in each of us and in our institutions.  In doing so, we can become strong, organized and clear in our efforts to dismantle racism.

Alumni may return and attend Phase I or Phase II workshops, as observers, as many times as they like.   Why would you want to do that?  Because the material is rich in content and complex to think about, I felt quite overwhelmed with all the new information.   I can only imagine that I would be listening much differently and benefit more deeply the second time around.   

Hart’s Mill strongly encourages members to attend this workshop as we  work towards embracing and including diversity in its many forms.  For information on dates and cost (sliding scale available), visit the OAR Alliance web site.  

[With apologies from Hope — this was completed a month ago but did not get posted.  Oy!]

On Sunday, February 19, 2017, participants in the architectural design workshops held a Retreat to review and assess the products and process from the Schematic Architectural Design phase.  The community received drawings and models from the Architects at the beginning of February, and we gathered a few weeks later to evaluate not only the drawings and plans, but also our work together around the dimensions of process, power, leadership, and collaboration.

In the morning, we shared our reactions on the Site plan, the Common House, the Houses, and the Drawings.  We evaluated the designs based on criteria that included Aesthetics, Functionality, Affordability, Energy efficiency, and Sustainable features.  We also addressed the Marketability of the designs as we seek to expand our membership and find more people committed to living at Hart’s Mill.  Although our group expressed a wide range of feelings, concerns, and reactions towards the designs, overall people were largely positive about the products that the Architects had delivered, and felt inspired by the vision of our Ecovillage that is coming into clearer focus.

In the afternoon, we shifted our attention to issues of process.  Our facilitator, Maria, began with a teaching about Power and Leadership and shared a handout on “101 Ways to have Power in a Group.”  As we each reflected individually on ways that we exercise power in a group setting, people were able to identify both healthy and unhealthy ways we exercise power.

We then spent time examining the dynamics, challenges, and successes in our six-month process within and among three groups: our 3-person shepherding committee, the community members and workshop group, and the architects.   This was a very informative discussion as we learned more about the different roles and experiences across these different groups.  We closed this segment by discussing possible next steps in the Architecture Design Process before shifting to the last topic of the day on collaboration.

For our final hour, we evaluated how well our group and we as individuals exercised cooperative skills during the Schematic Design process.  To begin, Maria provided some reflections on the necessity of a deep Culture Shift for cooperative groups to succeed.  Then we each evaluated our personal strengths and weaknesses based on our Hart’s Mill meeting Ground Rules—including criteria like staying on topic, welcoming diversity, sharing thoughts and feelings, and making decisions based on our mission, vision, and values.

It was a long day—both challenging and invigorating.  It’s important not to understate the difficulties of a collaborative design process.  Yet I am personally impressed with the group’s ability to navigate this process and end up with beautiful and inspiring architectural drawings and plans.  Furthermore, I find it inspiring that the group was willing to devote time to evaluate not only the products of the work, but also the process—including difficult conversations about power, leadership, and cooperation.  This work is not only a step towards our goal of living in an Ecovillage; it is also the very process of creating community together along the way.

On Saturday, December 17, Hart’s Mill members gathered for our final round of Schematic Architectural Design with our architects Suzy Cash, Frank Harmon, and Paul Drake.  We met in the Arcadia Common House, and the architects shared their work and progress since our last gathering in November.  Here is  a copy of the their slide presentation: hm-presentation-workshop-12-17-16

In November, the design workshop focused on Common House and Dwellings.  We saw three different possibilities for home design, and the architects collected a lot of feedback, questions, and preferences.   We met on the 17^th of December for the last of six workshops, which marks the end of the Schematic Design Phase of architectural development.

Site Plan

As a result of our design process with the architects, we now have a new Site Plan that is more compact and sits more gently on the land than the original plan approved by Orange County in November of 2015.  The new plan moves the village slightly north and east on the site to better follow the contours of the land and reduce the amount of grading and earth moving required.  The compact clustering of homes reflected the community’s decision to design half of the homes as duplexes, and about 75% as 2-story homes, which reduced our land footprint and decreased our overall roof square footage to help us with storm-water management.  The new plan also has a smaller pedestrian path running between the homes, which we hope will allow us to use less pavement and create a more intimate sense of connection between the houses.  Overall, the new plan does a better job of meeting our values of sustainability and affordability.  However, we will have to work with the County to ensure that there is adequate access for emergency vehicles in the village, so we may have to revise elements of the new Site Plan going forward.

Common House

In this iteration of design, we also saw an updated Common House design with slightly larger Dining Room and Café areas.  The architects have also rearranged the location and sizes of the Guest Rooms to create one larger suite with a private bath, and two sleeping nooks off the Library/Meeting Room.  This design choice was a response to community requests for different-sized Guest Rooms to accommodate visitors with different needs.  In the feedback rounds on Saturday, some members expressed concerns about privacy for guests using the sleeping nooks, so we may modify this element going forward to include an enclosed hallway for greater privacy.

Overall the Common House includes an indoor and outdoor kitchen, loft space above the kitchen, a dining room, café, a large screened porch for additional dining and meeting space, a library, an office, two guest areas, and a laundry room, plus patio space outdoors in the village green.  This iteration of the Common House includes additional storage and bathrooms close to the kitchen/dining/café areas, as well as the possibility of a root cellar and/or basement to be added in the upcoming stages of design.

Homes

For the Dwellings, the architects presented detailed floor plans for 5 different home designs: a One Bedroom home, with 1- and 2-story versions (720 and 580 square feet, respectively); a Two Bedroom home, with 1- and 2-story versions (1200 and 1280 square feet, respectively); and a Three Bedroom home (1600 square feet).  The Village will also contain two Shared Homes with five bedrooms each, but these units will be designed later. 

The homes use similarly designed “blocks” or sections that make them easier and more affordable to build.  They have a 3/12 roof pitch for a shed roof style that creates an intimate streetscape.  This low-sloping roof minimizes materials and also helps with affordability in construction, while still offering 95% solar gain for photovoltaic panels.  All homes will have screened porches and patios, and most will be clustered in groups of four around shared green space for private and community gardens.  Some of the units will have clerestory windows for light and ventilation.  One design change from the last workshop is that more homes now have south-facing roofs for solar panels, and the homes that have north-facing roofs will be attached to other homes in duplexes so they can use space on their neighbor’s south-facing roof for solar panels.

For many of us in the design process, we are learning how to read maps, drawings, and elevations, and some of struggled to get a sense of what it might feel like to live in these homes and in the village.  The architects have been very responsive to our requests for more detailed visuals, and have provided models, hand-drawn sketches, computer-generated layouts, and even some 3-D images.  They have taken time in workshops to walk us through drawings and elevations to help us understand.  On Saturday, when the architects shared streetscape drawings to provide a feel for walking and living amidst a cluster of homes, community members appreciated the warmth, intimacy, and visually compelling layout of the houses along the pedestrian path

While we still carry questions and concerns around affordability, storage space, sustainability, and county approval, we have come a very long way in this six-month Schematic Design process, and it is exciting to see the results: we now have almost-finalized schematic designs for Site Plan, Common House, and Dwellings!

What’s Next

Suzy, Paul, and Frank will continue to work on drawings and design, and will present final Schematic Design materials to the community by the end of January.

This design process continues to be a challenging and inspiring journey, as we get to know one another, learn to collaborate and work together, and begin to realize our goals of living in an ecovillage.  In the Mayan calendar, Saturday and Sunday were days guided by the energies of Vision and Elegance.  Together, the community members and the architects have done an amazing job bringing both elegance and vision into the architectural design work, and the results are beautiful.  I’m grateful for the opportunity to participate in, contribute to, and learn from this vital process of collaborative community design.

P.S. Party time!

After the workshop, Randy whipped up a fabulous dinner.  The meal was Mollie Katzen inspired from her Vegetable Heaven cookbook: a Tunisian tomato soup with lentils and chickpeas, a bulghur dish, a salad with figs and blue cheese, and pumpkin mousse for dessert.  It was heavenly, especially combined with the yummy appetizers, fizzy drinks, and desserts contributed by other members.  Anthony brought some caroling books and we had a blast making beautiful music together as Randy prepared the meal. 

For a special bonus, Suzy treated us to a display of her AMAZING rope-jumping prowess!  The rope was spinning so fast we couldn’t see it, and she was leaping under it, over it, and through it with astonishing skill!  We’d never seen such a display up close and personal, and it was so much fun to watch. 

Thanks to everyone who created a warm, delicious, and wonderful year-end celebration.

On Saturday, November 19^th, Hart’s Mill members gathered for another Architectural Design Workshop with our architects Frank Harmon, Suzy Cash, and Paul Drake.  We met in the Seymour Center in Chapel Hill, and the architects shared their work since our last gathering in October.  To see a copy of the their slide presentation, click here: hm-presentation-workshop-11-19-2016

After the October workshop, the community was faced with a host of specific design questions concerning Homes and the Common House.  In addition, some members had expressed concerns, anxieties, and misgivings about the direction of the design work, and especially about the aesthetic look and feel of the proposed homes.  After considering whether to slow down the design process, members of the General Circle and the Planning, Design, and Development Circle (PDD) made a commitment to explore member concerns while simultaneously addressing as many questions as possible, in order to provide direction to the Architects so they could prepare for the November workshop. 

Fortunately, we were able to address almost all of the most pressing questions and concerns, including issues around aesthetics, storage, and Common House layout, in a timely fashion.  Members from PDD met with the Architects ahead of the November 19^th workshop to plan the agenda for the day.  We asked the Architects to develop and present three different aesthetic options for the homes, and we requested a variety of visuals and drawings to help members understand and compare the different options.  The Architects also clarified the deliverables (i.e., the products) that we could expect at the end of this Schematic Design Phase, and we left content and eager to see the work to come.

When we met on Saturday, November 19^th, the Architects provided an overview of their approach to the design work.  They explained how our initial discussions about Hart’s Mill values and principles led to their work on the Site Plan, and how the Site Plan then became the foundation for the current work on Common House and Home design.  The Architects also addressed a concern expressed at the last workshop: some members had hoped to see a Southern vernacular style take shape in the project, and were disappointed that the proposed home designs did not fit that style.  The Architects explained their understanding of vernacular as “a language spoken by common people” and a “cultural expression of place,” and used the example of tobacco barns in eastern NC to illustrate how roof line, building shape, and materials can reflect the needs and goals of a specific people in a particular locale.  For our Architects, “vernacular” in the context of architecture means buildings that are pragmatic, informal, and meet the group’s values and needs, while also connecting to the cultural and regional context.

The architects then presented three different home design schemes.  The main differences in the home designs were based on roof pitch: the Street Smart scheme featured homes with a 3/12 pitch roof (a shed roof style); the Storage for All scheme featured a 12/12 pitch roof (a gable roof style, which was the steepest of the three); and the PV (PhotoVoltaic) Delight scheme featured a 6/12 pitch roof.  They shared street-level drawings and elevations to help us get a feel for walking and living amidst a cluster of the homes in each scheme.  The third scheme, PV Delight, provided the most roofs with good south-facing solar access plus the best roof angle for solar gain at 99%, though the other two roofs also did well at 95% solar gain for this region.  Street Smart seemed to provide more variety in the size and connections of the homes, which many members found visually compelling, and was also the most cost-effective design option.  Storage for All provided the most attic storage, but many members were concerned with the higher cost and lower efficiency of those designs.  Members discussed the balance of multiple elements in the designs, including sustainability, storage, cost, and visual impact, and the group was ultimately drawn to a blend of the Street Smart and PV Delight schemes.

The architects next presented two options for Common House design, both of which included added storage space and bathrooms closer to the kitchen/dining room.  In addition, the Common House designs raised questions about the location and design of the guest rooms, the size and location of the laundry room, and the location of the library/meeting room.  The two designs also offered different options for the overall shape of the building and how much it should extend and enclose the village green.  We left with questions to be addressed before the next workshop, and are working to provide the architects with our preferences for these designs so they can prepare for our next meeting together.

Our next and final workshop with the architects is scheduled for Saturday, December 17^th, and will focus on wrapping up issues for both Common House and Home Design, and extending our discussion of siding and roof materials for the buildings. 

As I mentioned in my last architecture Blog covering the October workshop, our group is working with a range of personal preferences, dreams, and visions for what the homes and the village could look like.  Tensions and conflicts have emerged, and that is a natural part of the process.  But I’m impressed and reassured that we have been able to listen to each other, express our feelings and preferences, and find ways to move forward together in the design work.  Amidst our challenges, we are improving our capacity to work with conflict productively and respectfully.  We are not just designing a village—we are getting to know each other and building community one step at a time.  Through this work, our hope is that we can design a village that inspires each of us, along with others to come. 

by Joe Cole

On Saturday, October 15, Hart’s Mill members gathered for another round of our Architectural Design Workshop with our architects Frank Harmon, Suzy Cash, and Paul Drake.  We met in the Chapel Hill Public Library on a bright afternoon, and the architects shared their hard work and progress since our last gathering in August.

In early September, Hart’s Mill members also met together to make a host of specific decisions around Site Plan, Common House Design, and Home Design, and we passed along our preferences to the architects.  So, by mid-October, we were very excited to see what the architects had come up with.

They started by presenting a revised and updated Site Plan with a more compact design, including the Common House in the center of the village.  The compact Site Plan reflected the community’s decision to design half of the homes as duplexes, and about 75% as 2-story homes, which reduced our land footprint and decreased our overall roof square footage to help us with storm-water management.  The plan also included covered parking to hold solar panels, and a provisional idea for our Education Center to sit near the pond.

Suzy describes a Common House concept

Next the architects presented drawings and a rough model of the Common House that included a mid-sized Dining Room to foster more intimate gatherings, and a large screened porch that could be used as overflow dining and meeting space for much of the year in temperate North Carolina.  Several members commented on the elegance and beauty of the design, and appreciated how the layout created a village commons and green nestled around the large oak tree on the property.

Could a duplex look like this?

After the group discussed pros and cons of the Common House design direction, the architects presented three separate Schemes for Home Design: the Variety, the Efficiency, and the Adaptable.  We were treated to some 2-D and 3-D drawings, along with a small model of a home representing one of the Schemes.  Group members appreciated the visuals and the variety of design schemes, and we spent much of our remaining time identifying the pros and cons of each Scheme, and generating questions for our community and the architects to address going forward.

Imagine conversing on a terrace by the oak tree

At the end of the meeting, several members expressed great appreciation for the architects.  Suzy, Paul, and Frank are doing an impressive job working with our group (typically about fifteen members attending the workshops) in a collaborative design process that aims to create a village that is sustainable, affordable, and beautiful.   As with any group, there is a range of preferences, dreams, and visions of what each person wants the village to look like.  Through this process, we are not just designing a village—we are getting to know each other, learning to work with our differences, and building community.  Our hope is that we can design a village that inspires each of us, along with others to come.

Common House rough concept in 3-D