Development Ideas for Ecovillage at Ithaca

Francis Vanek
November 1, 2002
email: francisvanek@yahoo.com

Dear members of Ecovillage at Ithaca,

During the last year of joining the Second Neighborhood and building our Ecovillage House, I have been gathering ideas for projects that I would like to explore now that we have moved here.  I have written them up in the following document, which I will make available in the common house and also on-line at

www.virtualithaca.com/francis/evi_concepts.html

Briefly, here is a description of each idea –

1. Research center at Ecovillage: a research and consultancy outfit based at ecovillage that researches energy efficiency, sustainable communities, and related topics
2. Financial services for energy-efficient housing: a mortgage and loan business specializing in the support of green building and intentional communities
3. Development of bicycle-oriented commuting from Ecovillage: improving bicycling facilities and helping ecovillagers to train for biking to/from Ecovillage, so as to make bicycling a more viable option
4. Continuing care community at Ecovillage: creating a continuing care neighborhood within the EVI property to demonstrate the possibility of combining continuing care and sustainable building
5. Commercial development of rt.79 road frontage: Generating income from the land and employment for ecovillagers on a site that is close to the main traffic stream on Rt.79.
6. Private secondary school at ecovillage: A small quasi-homeschool boarding school for high school age students that would provide tutoring by various members of EVI, self-administered education using the land as a “living classroom”, and activities in the Ithaca community.

Part of my purpose is to further the evolution of the EVI project.  It is my impression that most ecovillagers spend much of their day attending to the tasks of their family or household, the ongoing running of the community, and of course the enjoyment of the neighborhood and land right in the present moment, and so there are limits on the time available for these sorts of “big” projects.  So I am not expecting any of these ideas to materialize over night.  Also, I have taken my best guess at how to undertake some of these projects, but some of you may have expertise specific to some area that may help me to refine/correct some of the approach.  I hope that some of you will have time to read through this document at some point, and to email me your feedback.  I will keep a running list of comments so that I can refer back to them in the future.

Research Center at Ecovillage

   The objective of this concept is to create a center for environmental research at EVI, that provides paid employment to ecovillagers whose interests and talents are in this area, while at the same time supporting our mission of fostering sustainable communities beyond the boundaries of our own property.
   The function of this center is modeled along the lines of the Rocky Mountain Institute: a non-profit institution not directly part of any college or university (though it would probably find connections with Cornell and IC).  In the same way that Amory Lovins capitalized on the fame of his work on Demand-Side Management with the big utilities in order to create RMI, so we might use the fame and prestige of EVI as one of the premier (if not the premier) cohousing communities in the USA to launch the work of this center.  Also, it is my impression that Greg Thomas’s work as director of Performance Systems Development has come to resemble a sort of research/consultancy outfit housed within Ecovillage, so we can draw on this experience as well.
   The scope of this center’s work includes research and also R&D, consultancy, and advocacy work (thus the name I have given it is only preliminary and might be changed to better reflect what this center does).   Research within the center involves the study of how “green practices” in EVI or other communities reduce environmental impact; here we might win grants for funded research from the state or federal government, or else carry out research speculatively where we anticipate the results can lead to revenues for the center in the future.  “R&D” focuses specifically on the development of new technologies (for example energy saving devices or alternative energy uses) that can be patented or marketed.  Consultancy work involves paid work for other ecovillages, communities, or businesses that wish to draw on our experience.  Advocacy involves the support of legislation that favors the development of green technology and sustainable communities, as well as outreach to individuals and communities in the form of, for example, educational and publication free-of-charge of some of our findings that are in the public interest.  We would need to be careful about how to combine these functions: for example, it is important to keep separate the functions of objective research and advocacy, which can be perceived by others as tending to slant one’s perspective on research in one direction or another.  However, I do not think these two are mutually exclusive per se, there are many examples of skilled researchers who are also powerful advocates for change and progress.
   The fields within which the center would do work would likely be a reflection of who was involved and where their interests lay, given that the field of “environmental research” in general is so broad that we could not possibly cover all areas.  I anticipate that some of the following might emerge:

· energy efficient building and green building materials
· sustainable communities (including land use patterns, alternative transportation modes in communities, and social factors)
· greening of industry (creation of green technologies, promotion of corporate environmental management, green services, green lifestyle products, and the like)
· sustainable agriculture and food supply (including organic farming, community supported agriculture, and so on)

We could think about how we want to mix support for the local community and region with catering to the national market.  It is my experience that as a person with an engineering background who lives at ecovillage and knows many people in Ithaca, I am a magnet for inquiries of the sort “can you build X / install X / carry out X project for us?”, which so far I have not been in the position to provide.  Time will tell whether such individuals are really willing to put their money where their mouth is, but the local market seems promising, at least.
   The goal of the Center would be to get up and running using existing office space or home offices, without the construction of a purpose-built office.  During this time, ecovillagers who wish to participate might continue their current work while gradually phasing in work on contracts for the Center, or else bring over research/consultancy work they currently have so that it is carried out under the auspices of the Center.  A longer term goal is to build a moderately-sized showcase office so that we could demonstrate the technologies we advocate, in the same way that Rocky Mountain Institute demonstrates superefficient building design in Snowmass, Colorado, at their headquarters.  There have been some other interesting examples of this recently, including the headquarters of ABN Amro Bank in the Netherlands which has won awards for green building design, as well as a proposed environmental education center in England which is being built as a showcase of green technology (appeared in a back issue of Positive News, I will add this later when I find the website).
ABN-Amro: http://www.abnamro.com/environmentreport/
Positive News: http://www.positivenews.org.uk
 

Financial services for energy-efficient housing

   The idea behind this concept is to meet a growing environmental need consistent with the goals of EVI itself, while at the same time creating employment opportunities right here in the community.
   As a starting point, many residents of Ecovillage, myself included, will have experienced the skepticism of mainstream US financial institutions in regard to novel, ecologically-minded housing developments such as ecovillage.  They prefer to deal with what they know best, namely the single-house on single lot, which considers only strict financial aspects (likely cost to build, expected value of sale), and not the broader social and environmental context within which we build our homes.  So the ecovillage (and other low-pollution-but-high-upfront-cost housing types) must compete for money in the same market, and are put at a disadvantage: either rejected outright by many lenders, or restricted in the type of mortgage available, or required to meet very high down payment requirements (20 to 25%).
   To get around this obstacle, people who want to build these types of buildings can create their own financial institution whose stated purpose is either entirely, or for the most part, to finance all types of green building projects, including ecovillages.  Thus it takes funds from investors and lends them to individual households or entire communities who are building residential units (and possibly commercial buildings as well).  The intention is that return on investment would be competitive with other types of socially responsible investment opportunities that pay a steady return with no risk to the lender.  In the interim, I will call this institution the “Ecobank.”
   This idea is inspired by the Mondragon Cooperative group in the Basque region of Spain, a collection of industrial and retail cooperatives (i.e. worker-owned firms) founded about 50 years ago that produce a wide range of manufactured products (for example, Fagor appliances and kitchenware).  (You can learn more about them at
http://www.sfworlds.com/linkworld/mondragon.html.)  During its initial growth, the Mondragon group faced a similar problem of lack of access to capital, and responded by opening their own cooperative bank to receive deposits that could then be lent to the firms.  Not only did this move create the necessary financial vehicle for growing the business, but it also became the prototype for a range of “secondary cooperatives”, or firms whose primary purpose is to provide the services that the primary industrial cooperatives typically requiring, including an insurance business, health care network, and technical institute.
   Just as the range of eligible depositors in the Mondragon bank is not limited to the working members of the cooperative, so too the investors in the Ecobank need not be members of this or any other ecovillage or cohousing community.  Rather, the Ecobank is open to any member of the public that wishes to invest in green building.  This broadening of the investment pool should greatly increase the total pool of funds available to the Ecobank, especially since the cohousing members have often invested heavily in their own community and therefore are not in a position to make other investments.  It also provides an outlet for the many inviduals who wish to support the cohousing/ecovillage movement, but due to their circumstances are not able to join such a neighborhood.
   Again in the interest of creating a broad enough economic base for the business to be viable, the scope of investment would not be limited to cohousing communities, but might also include new urbanist housing developments, energy efficient subdivisions (for example, a subdivision in which all houses are Energy-Star compliant), energy efficient single dwellings, or energy efficiency retrofits onto existing buildings.  In addition, if the management of the Ecobank judged that the pool of eligible investments was not sufficiently diverse and therefore too risky for the investors, some portion of the fund might be put instead into other types of socially responsible investment.  However, the intention of the Ecobank should be to invest primarily in green building, so as not to dilute the focus of its work.
   Lastly, the Ecobank can provide an ideal cottage industry for Ecovillage at Ithaca.  The work is portable by nature, involving data management and use of the internet that can be carried out from a common house office or home computer.  It would build on our previous experience in building the two neighborhoods, since the viability of loans would need to be validated by considering the building technology, costs, climactic conditions, etc.  Also, I believe that, far from being a stale exercise in “counting beans”, work in the bank would be quite creative and rewarding, involving both working with loan recipients to make their projects viable, and making the case to the general public in order to win the necessary investment funds.

Development of bicycle-oriented commuting from Ecovillage

   This concept is part of the broader work on alternative transportation at Ecovillage.  I have already circulated some ideas over email about another major component, increased use of transit, so I am not including those here.
   The core of this concept is to decrease car use and increase bike use at ecovillage by increasing the amount of bike use.  The main difficulty involved is obviously the steep hill between EVI and downtown Ithaca, and so the challenge is one of physical fitness, not only to be able to ride up the hill one time, but to be able to do so on a continuing basis, from whatever age one is able to first do so, through middle age and possibly even retirement age.  The discussion of this idea is thus inherently anecdotal and personal in nature.  There is also an underlying premise: if we as a neighborhood figure out how to teach and train ecovillagers to become bike commuters, then we can make bicycling more viable as an alternative transportation strategy.
   Starting at the beginning of the bicycle commuting lifespan, if we can encourage young adults from their early teens onward to develop the stamina to bike up steep hills, I believe that this will tend to favor ongoing bicycling fitness.  Growing up in Ithaca in the 1970s and early 80s, my peers and I had two such physical challenges that we did to prove our toughness (!).  One was biking around Cayuga Lake (and keeping track of how long it took).  The other was biking up steep hills without getting off our bikes:  Buffalo St, Aurora St, and so on.  This helped me to be able to bike up steep hills around Ithaca as an adult.  While I think it is possible for someone to start as a non-hillclimber as an adult and gradually work up to the ability to climb up West Hill, I think it is easier to start as a teenager and maintain that capability into adulthood.
   Next we come to middle age, and I can use my own experience as an example.  I see my “bike commuting career” as consisting of starting around age 20 and lasting until the age of 65, or 45 years.  At the age of 35, I feel like I have already bike-commuted a great deal (both in Ithaca and elsewhere), but I am only one third of the way to the goal, so I need to ride carefully, especially when riding up the hill from Ithaca.  The goal is not to maximize the cardiovascular system (i.e. ride as hard as possible), but to protect the musculoskeletal system (i.e. ride gently in a low gear, so that I can ride year after year without wearing out joints, ligaments, etc).
   Lastly comes the end of career stage, and here I draw the lesson from the great range of ages at which people give up bicycling.  At the upper end, as an undergraduate at Cornell in the late 80s, I used to tune up a bike for a retired math professor named Morris Tanenbaum, who at the age of 85 could still ride from his home on Honness Lane to the Cornell campus, a distance of about a mile.  The lesson to me is that while some of this longevity may be innate, there may also be things that can be done to allow people to keep riding longer.
   To summarize, the components of this strategy are 1) to introduce teenagers to bike commuting, if possible, 2) to help adults to learn how to bike commute, and 3) to look for ways to keep people riding later into life.  I am especially interested in “coaching” other ecovillagers on riding up from town on a trial basis, to see whether it is useful to have a coach in order to overcome initial difficulties with biking up from town.  My hypothesis is that one doesn’t need to have superhuman fitness for this, you need to gain some threshold level of fitness and also get used to riding up the hill.  There is also some interesting research going on at the Human Performance Laboratory at Ball State University in Indiana (http://www.bsu.edu/hpl/) on long-life physical endurance, which we may be able to tap in to.  I am also considering contacting them in the future to see if they would be interested in studying lifelong bike commuting in a situation like ours.

Continuing Care Community at Ecovillage
 
   This concept is to contribute to the continuing care movement by prototyping a small-sized continuing care community that uses sustainable building practices here on the EVI property (or possibly retrofitting part of one of the existing neighborhoods).  By continuing care community I mean a housing development designed for the elderly which allows for varying levels of assistance, ranging from independently living to assisted living.  You can see an example of this at the website for the Kendal Corporation (www.kendal.org) which has built several such communities in the northeastern US.
   This idea is still in a very embryonic form, but one of the main purposes would be to demonstrate that a continuing care community can be built which is energy efficient, sustainable, and functional, and for which any additional costs from use of green technology (better insulation, low-e windows, etc), are paid back in a reasonable payback period due to reduced utility costs.  To some extent, the existing neighborhoods may already provide good accessibility for senior residents – it would be interesting to gather opinions on this question – but if some members were in a situation where they could no longer live in an existing ecovillage house, the continuing care neighborhood might allow them to continue living at ecovillage.

Commercial development of rt.79 road frontage

   This idea is based on a discussion I had with the Webbers about the Civano community in Tucson.  Apparently Civano has a dedicated commercial hub in the center of its land area with shop fronts and so on, which has had limited success because non-residents cannot find it from the main arterial highway that passes along the edge of the community.  In retrospect, the Civano residents feel they could have been more successful by having the commercial development on the edge of the community: non-residents can find it easily and will come in greater numbers since they drive right past it, non-resident traffic into the neighborhood is reduced, and residents can still easily patronize these businesses.
   Why not try something similar at EVI?  We could set up a few small shops or other cottage industries at the entrance to Rachel Carson Way.  This would make use of the part of the property that is the least desirable for residences because it is so close to the highway.  It would also contribute a positive cash flow to the community as a whole, which could be used to offset the burden created by the high cost of the land parcel.  Also, the commute would be ideal (creating a separation between home and work that some people prefer, though short enough for biking or walking), and it might also enable businesses to be opened on ecovillage land that we might not otherwise want in the heart of the residential neighborhood (for example retail businesses that may generate excessive car traffic).

Private secondary school at ecovillage

   The concept here is to created a boarding school on ecovillage land with a small number of students (perhaps 15 or 20), ages 14-18, whose education will draw on the expertise of community members (and possibly some additional paid professional teachers), the natural setting of the land, and the resources of the Ithaca community.  I see this as a money-maker, in which the school is able to charge a fairly high tuition in return for accreditation by some appropriate body as well as an educational experience that can compete with that provided by other boarding schools.  However, we could also emphasize accessibility regardless of ability to pay so that the school would cover its costs but not necessarily provide income to EVI.
   Students in the school would either live in a purpose-built dormitory with educational facilities (computers, meeting rooms, library, etc) or board with other ecovillage residents.  They would meet with teachers/mentors on a regular basis during the course of the week, but the majority of the time would be spent engaged in study, work on the land, field trips into the community, or service projects.  Periodically their progress would be evaluated by the teachers/mentors, though this might or might not entail the awarding of formal “grades.”  Since the students are likely to pursue higher education at a university or college, they would need to develop the ability to do well on exams and the writing of essays, but the hope is that these skills can be developed in the context of the living laboratory environment that the school seeks to provide, rather than in time-consuming, rote-learning of information divorced from practical experience.