Common Ground Ecovillage

By Joe Cole

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.

by Joe Cole

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.