Epic Huggles

Nov. 19 Discussion

As demonstrated in "Common Fire," our lives are defined by the people and places that we surround ourselves with.  I feel very fortunate to have a handful of close threshold people in my life.  Coming to Virginia Tech I have met many people who have had a positive impact on my life, in particular my best friend, Catherine.  We met our freshman year, and although we lived on the same hall, we did not become friends until the end of September, after a dinner 'date' with my roommate, RA, and Catherine.  Ever since then, she has been a great friend and has indirectly taught me a lot about myself.  She is a strong person and passionate about life, which she has reflected onto me.  She is a great person to confide in, and uses her past experiences, whether good or bad, to help me view a situation from a more objective point of view.  Over our four year friendship, she is someone who has shaped my life for the better.

Like a threshold person, a hospitable space is equally as important.  This space would be my hometown; however, I did not realize this until recently.  Driving home one weekend this past semester I realized how much I had taken it for granted and focused in on the wrong things; a crisp fall day, with the smell of peanut fields, and being surrounded by the James River can realign your point of view.  My hometown is my hospitable space because it is where I feel most comfortable and worry-free (more or less).  I am surrounding by my family and good food, with familiarity that adds a sense of security.  Although I do not plan on moving back home immediately after graduation, it is somewhere I know will always be there for me whenever I need to re-energize and surround myself the familiarity that reminds me of who I am.

11/19 Discussion

Since I've come to Tech, there have been multiple people and places that act as Threshold People and Hospitable Places for me. The most special person that still act as a threshold person for me in a lady from church (everyone else just moved away.) She is a mother figure in my life. Base on "Common Fire," she acts as a mentor who really challenges, supports, and inspires me to be a better woman, citizen, and stronger in my spiritual life. From her, I was able to learn more about not just how to be a good student, but also the skills that will help me as a wife and a mother later on in my life. She's been there with me through many crisis, willing to let me come whenever  I need to or offers incredible advices. 

11/19 Discussion question

Someone who stands out as a threshold person in my life is my family.  We lived out in the middle of the mountains by ourselves; we had only a couple of neighbors that lived within a mile of us, so I basically relied on my family and no one else.  My family raised me in the outdoors, taught me right from wrong, and told me a college education would take me far in life.  So growing up all I did was hunt, trap, and fish by myself which kept me out of a lot of trouble; therefore, after high school I went straight to college and now I’m going to graduate this December.  When I first went to college, I basically I had no one too rely one for advice, so I pretty much relied on myself, and did not depend on anyone else for anything.  After four years of college I still rely on myself and I’ve definitely learned a lot fast growing up, so it should help me out in the long run.  In a way I’m thinking that learning to be independent is good because when I get a job in my field it will require mostly if not all independent work, but it could also be bad in a way if it requires quick adaptation to other people’s environment.

November 19th Discussion Question

                       

Common Fire introduces two main ideas that are easily extracted and applied to our individual life. Those ideas are (1) threshold person and (2) hospitable places and I am fortunate enough to say that I have had both in my life.  When trying to pick one of each, I tried to determine who and what places have had the greatest impact upon me. Although I feel like many people have served as a threshold person to me throughout my life and various places could easily be classified as hospital places, there are clear ones that have been most significant in my life.

A recent and current threshold person in my life is a good friend of mine here at school, Chris.  As members of the same social service organization, Chris and I met early in our college careers.  I have always greatly respected him for his values and code of ethics he follows, but also for his steadfast dedication and commitment he has for all he knows and does.  Throughout the past 3 years, our relationship has grown deeper to where we feel comfortable sharing our thoughts and beliefs with one another.  He has always encouraged me to "get out of your own backyard" and think about the world around us.  Helping me to see things in a different light and without predisposed prejudices and opinions has allowed me to improve my thought process and in turn, maker better decisions and become a better person. 

Throughout my life, as I have said, many places have served as hospitable, according to the definition provided by Common Fire. One of the most prominent examples I can think of is what is called the German Club Manor.  This is the home of my fraternity and is a place that is where trust and hospitality are practiced.  More importantly, it is the place where we learn about ourselves, each other and the life in general through the meetings, events, and programs we hold there.  The Manor is a place that I call home, especially when away from my family, where I will always feel comfortable being myself.

Discussion Questions for Wednesday's Blog Group

I'm the discussion leader for tomorrow's blog group if we have time for one. Its basically a few questions about the readings from Common Fire. I put the page numbers for further reading.

Questions and Issues: Discussion on Community Leadership and Fostering a Commitment to a New Commons

I would like to make a quick note before we delve into the discussion today. Most of the questions I’ll be asking are personal in nature and ask how you became more in tune with the “new global commons”. 

I will be asking for certain events, individuals, or periods of emotional or intellectual awakening that lead you to where you are today. We are all interested in Community Involvement because we are here this evening. Some of us may be here because this course is “required” or its “filling a core area”, but I like to believe that we’re here to make a difference and something on a deeper, more personal level caused our paths to lead us here.

If you don’t feel like fully conveying these things that is understandable, but I ask you respect the stories of the others in the group.

Issues to Discuss

Leadership

The Eroding of the “Commons” and the Emergence of the New Global Commons

Threshold People and Hospitable, safe Places

The Trap of Tribalism and Encounter with the “Otherness”

Marginality

Questions

1.       Leadership

a.       What is leadership?  What are the qualities a community leader should possess? Who are the leaders in your community at home? Here at school? Think of the leaders within the organizations you’re involved with. Do they possess the qualities of an effective leader? 

b.      Leadership involves living in a state of possibility, making a commitment to a vision, developing relationships that lead to collective action and sustaining a high level of character and integrity. Effective leadership takes place in the context of community grounded in the shared values of people who work together to effect positive change for the betterment of others, the community, and society.

2.       Global Commons and Commitment to the Common Good

a.       From the readings in the first chapter of Common Fire, what does the term “a new global commons” mean to you?

b.      Common Fire describes some of the reasons behind the inability of some individuals to become immersed in the new global commons. This includes individualism, busyness and consumerism, cynicism, and Tribalism. Which of these societal “traps” most concerns you and seems to keep the majority of individuals disconnected with the “global commons”?

                                                               i.      Individualism: pg. 10-11

                                                             ii.      Busyness and Consumerism: pg. 11

                                                            iii.      Cynicism: pg. 11-12

                                                           iv.      Tribalism: pg. 12-13

c.       Do you see yourselves as members of the individuals considered to be “Committed to the Common Good” or the “The Comparison Group”?

                                                               i.      Commitment to the Common Good: pg. 15-16

1.       What does the “common good” mean to you?

2.       What groups, people, and concerns have you committed yourselves to? How do these concerns translate into the “survival and prosperity of the whole earth community”?

                                                             ii.      The Comparison Group: p. 16

1.       What can be done to prevent us from “burning out”?

2.       Why do you feel overwhelmed and unable to grapple with today’s complex issues?

3.       Threshold People and “Hospitable” and “Safe” spaces

a.       Who stands out as a “threshold person” or “hospitable space” (pp. 52-53) in your time at Tech or hometown life before you got here? How did these individuals, groups, places affect you and push you towards becoming more connected in the new global commons?

4.       The Trap of Tribalism and Encounters with “Otherness”

a.       “You have to change individuals and change society. You have to deal with both if you want real progress. It’s important to change an individual who thinks there is no hope, and it’s important to change the system that destroys hope.”(p.57)

                                                               i.      Where do you see yourself? Do you tend to focus on the “individual with no hope” or the “system that destroys hope”? In which way are we helping society progress more or do we need to focus on both like the author says?

b.      “The single most important pattern we have found in the lives of people committed to the common good is what we have come to call a constructive, enlarging engagement with the other.” (p.63) It is at this point that individuals become committed. 

                                                               i.      Do you believe that this is the most important characteristic of those “committed to an inclusive common good”? Why and if not what is the most important characteristic?

                                                            ii.      When was your encounter with “Otherness”? (p.65) Was it in the form of a single, constructive engagement or was it a “moment of feeling instead? Or was it a pattern of engagement?

                                                            iii.      Have you experienced this encounter with “Otherness” yet?

5.       How will you continue to foster this commitment to the common good in the future?

11/19 Discussion Question

Someone who stands out to me as a threshold person in my life was a teacher I had throughout high school.  Not only was she my teacher sophomore and senior years, she was my SCA head all 4 years I was in SCA.  What stands out to me though was during senior year, I began having spinal issues where I lost the ability to even feel the left side of my body.  Even though she and I had been close already, that was something we were able to form an even closer relationship on, because she also had a major spinal problem that she has been taking heavy medication for for years.  Through that commonality, she supported me, giving me a place to go if I was in so much pain, I couldn’t sit through my other classes (one of the advantages of being in SCA, just use it as an excuse).  Her room became a “safe place” for me because it not only allowed me to not have to hide the pain, but she and I discussed a lot of world issues, politics, etc which helped encourage my interest in those issues.  If it wasn’t for her, I probably wouldn’t be in the field I’m in today, which is designed to serve the people.  Today, she and I are still in contact and when we get together, either me going to her classroom or going out to lunch, we catch up, and then fall right back into talking about politics, world issues, etc.  She challenges me to look beyond what I learn/hear and to really think for myself and what I truly believe, how to defend my point of view, how to explain it to others, and how to use it to help the community that I live in. I hope that we always stay in touch because she is definitely someone that I look up to and have always seen as the person who encouraged me to become what I am today.

Discussion for November 12

The social problem that I have been discussing throughout the semester is environmental justice or environmental inequality. This issue encompasses a wide variety of problems including social inequality and discrimination, racism, poverty, and political helplessness. A particular issue involved with these overarching problems is the consistent siting of landfills, waste incinerators, and other sources of pollution that more affluent, powerful members of society impose on poorer communities.

This particular issue is a hybrid of sorts because it is a mobilizing/recruitment issue, but it is also a long-range issue as well. Fighting the siting of these undesirable industries and land uses will generate dissatisfaction about perceived conditions and spur people to action. The thought of more air and water pollution issues and continued degradation of the neighborhood would illustrate the problem to those living here and give them motivation to stop it. However, the process of getting an injunction to halt the construction of these facilities will be difficult to procure in a short amount of time. This is why I consider this issue a long-range one as well. The legal battles could be long and difficult on the community and this could cause less people to become involved. They might believe that the people trying to site this landfill might just be too powerful to stop. However, it will be important to nourish community involvement in this situation and the benefits to the community would be great.

The issue at hand is a good one in order to solve the overall problem of environmental injustice and discrimination. If a targeted community can fight off the placement of a landfill, etc. then this will give hope to discriminated communities across the country. Also long battles in courts could generate adequate media attention, which in turn would raise the awareness of this particular issue. Fighting the siting of a landfill or other undesirable industry would require concrete action, immediate action, offers the beneficiaries a way to participate, would promote community unity, and would involvement plenty of emotional and intellectual attachment. Individual human health won’t be the only concern of the community. Their values and ways of life could be altered forever. These are important things for anyone to fight for.

The issue is immediate because it involves something the community is currently worried about: the siting of another polluting industry. The issue is pretty specific and actionable. People can do something to stop this problem from getting any worse. Also communities have stopped the construction of highways, landfills, and industries before and it can be accomplished again. This issue is a threat not only to health and the community, but to the emotions of each individual fighting it. It will be important to make sure that the community feels that these personal values are at stake, that something can be done (even if its incremental), that this issue does affect them, and it would be helpful to instill a vision of what the community will look like in the future.

Individuals in the leadership core of the community organization will serve the purpose of keeping things alive and moving, would do everything to ensure that the movement wouldn’t dwindle and die. Without them others might not feel that anything is being done, because this core group usually goes above and beyond what is required. This core group will also make sure that a clear picture of the overall program is kept running. However, the leadership core wouldn’t be able to keep the movement going on its own. We would need both workers and advisers in this situation. Workers provide the majority of hands on work needed to ensure the success of the movement and have a steady interest in the succeeding. Advisers would be needed to accomplish more technical problems. This could include setting up meetings with the media, giving us guidance on how to proceed at certain times, or how to influence a public figure. These advisers wouldn’t be attached to the community organization directly, but would still provide very insightful guidance.

Nov. 12 Discussion

Staying consistent with similar topics I have discussed in the past, I am going to focus my social problem on development, with the issue centralized around economic development.  Economic development is a strong community based issue because the development coming into the area can have both a strong and negative impact.  I am calling development a “problem” because of the inconsistent opinions by a community to bring in new opportunities for revenue; viewing development, especially in rural areas, as a way to become urbanized. 

Economic development is a mobilizing issue within the greater problem of development.  Because economic development plays on the community’s self-interest, the community becomes more invested and involved with the development problem.  Economic development is a good issue to address because concrete action can occur, ie: you are either in favor or not; emotional and intellectual attachment is there; and community unity can be promoted with response to the needs of the issue/organization. Action for or against economic development is embedded in the personalized, invested emotions and attitudes towards this type of development.  The issue will have a cause for action through a simulated vision of what economic development can provide the community, therefore allowing the community to look at the broader picture and the benefits the vision can provide.  Action for economic development can sometimes be a slow process, but once people become personally invested, then action becomes an active issue for change.

Individuals have a lot of opportunity to become involved; the three most common would be leadership, workers, and advisors.  The most active role for the economic development process is the role of leadership.  It is the leaders, who seek out advisors, because there have become aware of a development problem, and would like to use economic development as a way to counteract it.  The advisors also play a very important role for economic development.  Advisors help guide the community through a more expertise perspective, providing the community with different avenues of development.  Finally, it is the workers who are the most invested, who help keep the economic development process active.  Economic development is a very involved process that requires a great deal of community involvement to help provide the best opportunities for the people.

November 12th Discussion Questions

Heavy dependence on the automobile is a challenging problem facing our society today.  As a result of our sprawling style development, many are forced to spend excessive amounts of time commuting, stuck in traffic or searching for parking.  This not only affects our personal lives in terms of free time, available cash flow, health and overall happiness, but also greatly affects how our tax money is spent and the impact we have on the natural environment.  This problem, although very large scale, must still be addressed locally and doing so through a community-based organization effort is an ideal way to draw attention to local citizens so that it really "hits home" with them.

One specific issue related to the much broader problem of heavy automobile dependence is the high costs it incurs to users.  Automobiles are expensive to purchase, maintain and insure and are not something that everyone is able to afford.  Many times, money that would be spent elsewhere is spent on fuel or maintenance just to afford the user the ability to travel to where they need to go.  This issue is especially evident as fuel prices reach record levels, the economy slows and people lose significant amounts of personal wealth.

There are many alternatives to personal transportation in the automobile.  To draw attention that will result in changes to alleviate the heavy dependence on the automobile, one first must identify what type of issue they are dealing with.  The (increasingly) high costs of automobile dependence is a specific, mobilizing issue in many respects.  The strongest way to strike at people’s self-interest is through their wallet, where it hurts the most.  Factors such as rising fuel costs, longer commutes and the increasing hassle of finding parking will hopefully illustrate the problem and give people something to do about it (Homan p.353).

The high costs of automobile usage is a good issue to address the larger problem of our society's heavy dependence on the automobile because no matter what your stance is on the environment, how you think taxes should be spent, how much money you have or what you do for a living, everyone likes to save money.  This issue emphasizes what a money pit automobiles are and will strike peoples self-interest to get involved and therefore, save themselves money.  The suggested immediate action of driving less and/or carpooling is clearly communicated when people realize the high costs. This issue will also promote community unity because it affects nearly everyone and responds to the needs of the community, whether it be a high amount of through traffic or road noise.

This issue will lead people to action by continuing to "rub raw the sores of discontent" (Homan p.357) focused around the increasingly high costs of driving an automobile.  The price of fuel, higher costs of parts and labor, and increased traffic will generate enough emotion among citizens to get them off their feet and start looking at ways to reduce their costs and dependence on driving.

Obviously, the community-based organization effort would need a core group of leadership to head up the effort.  These leaders would serve in a much more active capacity than, for example, the workers or assisters by actively organizing and participating in any meetings held and fundamentally initiating the changes.  However, the roles of workers and assisters are also very important.  These roles would likely make up most of the remaining community members and would offer critical support to the leadership and take part in the changes they initiate.  Something that would need to be addressed is the workers and assisters dedication and loyalty to the issue, especially long-term.  If the dependence on the automobile is to be broken, it will take a strong commitment to change from not just the leadership, but also a wide swath of the community.

11/12 Discussion

Just to be consistent with what I blogged about in the beginning of the semester, I chose Environmental Degradation as my problem. Specifically, Environmental Degradations as result of Solid Wastes. Wastes are taking over a lot of our land. We are running out of space to put landfills. And as a result of our waste capacity running low, living standard is decreasing due to proximity to landfills that are full of pathogens and all kind of corrosive chemicals. Life is definitely not pleasant when you live near a landfill. And the problem continues to grow as people generate more wastes.

My issue is Recycling. By recycling, we would save the dump trucks numerous trips to the landfills, thus, reduce the need for landfills to grow. But unfortunately, not a whole lot of people are doing this. People would rather throw a plastic bottle away even if the recycling bin is right next to the trash can. The action was probably done sub-consciously. So the issue here is the mind set. People don't have the mind set that automatically recycles instead of tossing.

-This is a long-range issue because it would take a lot of effort for people to be able to see the consequences of their actions.
-It is a good issue to address the problem of overflowing landfills because they are very closely related, since people can help solve the problem if they take action with the issue.
-This can lead into actions by a lot of means. People can feel guilty for not recycling if recycling becomes something "cool" that everyone does. They can also be more aware when the discomfort of having to live close to trash hits home for them before we all actually have to do it.
-On going active participants, advisers, and general supporters are three level of participation that would really help the issue lead to actions. There should be people recycling on a regular basis, advising others to do the same, and more and more people supporting 100% recycling.

11/12 Discussion question

The social problem I want to talk about is gun control and rights.  The issue here is simply gun related accidents either by children or adults.  The type of issue here is mobilizing or recruitment because this strikes self interest through peoples past experiences with the issue.  People put a lot of emotion into this concept because if the correct actions or laws were passed the related incidents could be reduced or even eliminated in some cases.  These types of issues draw quick results from people but are hard to get put into action.  This is a good issue because people promote change because it seems like a straight forward problem with a quick simple fix, but this issue is forever ongoing.  The countries pass history with gun laws has made it very difficult for change with the different organizations fighting for change and those fighting against change.  This issue will lead to action because a lot of people in US have had family related gun accidents or family members being hurt by guns.  So this issue will always have people looking for quick action to solve this problem to reduced future accidents involving guns.  The people who will play an active role for this issue are the leadership core, workers, and advisers.  The leaders are the core group and will always be on top of the issue working hard to solve the problem and bring some relief to the people.  Workers are the people who have been involved with gun related accidents that want change and but can’t make to all the discussions or deliberations but are active participants most of the time.  Advisers are the people that can provide information, ideas, or support on these issues.  They know how to get things done right and will help people put words into action for responses.

11/12 Discussion

The social problem I selected that can be addressed through a community based organization is deteriorating environmental issues in a community.  The issue that I’m going to focus on is lack of recycling at a community level and that governmental action should implement a recycling program.

Recycling is considered a specific issue. More specifically it can be considered a long-range issue. While some citizens may see recycling as a way to help preserve the environment on a more long-range time range, others may shun the idea because it is long-range and feel that they won’t reap any immediate benefits, so why bother?

It is a good issue to address the problem of deteriorating environments in the community it suggests immediate action - even though it has long term effects, it is simple to understand, people have a self-interest in recycling because it will benefit them and their children, grandchildren, etc., offers easy ways for people to participate (ie paying for a recycling bin, filling it, putting it on the street, and it being collected for you), helps unite the community in the effort to help preserve the environment, and provides a moderate challenge in that some people don’t believe it’s necessary since there is no immediate self-interested, material satisfaction.

The issue will lead to action by people realizing that this simple action done everyday can benefit the environment. It requires very little effort, and barely anymore time than it would to throw an item in the trash. Do this, people will visibly see how much trash reduction there is, providing an immediate visible change.  Ways to help initiate and gather enough people to put pressure on the government to provide recycling services, will be to highlight aspects that make people feel angry or guilty, almost a peer pressure effect too (my neighbors are recycling, maybe I should too); challenge people to separate their trash and recyclables so that there can be another visual to use as a case to present the government; point out details that benefit the individual citizen; if the government is saying that they want to be more sustainable, then hold them to their word, even on this simple action; etc.

Three levels of citizen participation can be critical to the effort for getting a community recycling program.  A leader(s) needs to be present to be the voice for the group, providing motivation and group unity so that there is a cohesive front going to the governmental body asking for change.  One shot participants can even be useful because they may only come out to the public meeting, but just that support could be enough, because the elected body may see the numbers and acknowledge that there is a large constituency that wants the policy, even if you’ve never stepped into an active role in the group.  Additionally, inactive general supporters could be good because they will be the ones who may not say anything during the discussion, but will be actively recycling once the program is in place, giving credibility to the policy once its enacted.

Co-housing: Community, Ecology, and a little Kool Aid

Co-housing is a new concept for me and it seems like its guiding values are in the right place. I agree that the community atmosphere, the connectedness, the ties with the ecological community, the consensus building, and closeness of the co-housing community’s inhabitants will produce positive social capital. Co-housing units seem to build healthy relationships and trust between their inhabitants, create a sense of belonging and importance during the decision making process, and provide clean, safe, and diverse habitats for all of the unit’s inhabitants. I love the concept of the Common House, growing food in local gardens, the ecological awareness, the protection of open space, and the pedestrian-oriented style of the neighborhood. I feel that too many suburban development today’s employ the exact opposite traits of the co-housing unit and this trend is degrading community action and involvement. The suburban design currently promotes, in my honest opinion, an individualist lifestyle in which each family unit doesn’t really show interest in the health and well-being of the overall community. Each family tends to mind their own business, water their expense landscaping, and eventually become entirely detached from important issues. Co-housing seeks to remedy this current trend of suburban isolation and sprawl in a pretty attractive manner. Also the decisions of the community are made by individuals that know the most about that community: the members. This seems like a very logical way to solve local issues and is a great idea.

In the long run I really hope this idea of co-housing becomes an increasingly attractive alternative to the normal developments taking place today. However, I see a few pitfalls/concerns that could potentially make this transition towards co-housing difficult. The major issue I have with co-housing is the selection process. The second step of the co-housing agenda involves the selection of community members. Couldn’t this lead to I don’t know…lawsuits? The selection process doesn’t seem to be based on much and I’m not even sure if a selection process is even fair. I mean how do you tell a family applying to live in your community, “No Thanks.  You’re not what we’re looking for right now.”? Isn’t that a little elitist? Also my “Where is the red Kool-Aid, because the aliens are behind the comet” radar is slightly beeping here. Call me paranoid or whatever. Maybe I do not quite understand the governmental structures of these co-housing units. Just something seems a little off. Also consensus based decision making seems to be a great idea on paper, but unless you practice it extensively and work out every kink it doesn’t work as well as you think. The EC is consensus based, however if our three most vocal members want something to happen it does. Yes they look around to make sure other EC members are in agreement, but they never are. I feel as if a few more vocal, visible members of the community are going to have a lot more influence because new, outspoken members won’t want to disagree with them and get kicked out. Also if you disagree with this hidden power you can find yourself being ostracized from the community; even if it doesn’t occur intentionally. Smart growth…yes. Cluster development…yes. Co-housing…? I honestly don’t know what to think. Hopefully things can be cleared up for me tonight.

Discussion Q- Nov 5.

I have chosen to look at Takoma village in Washington dc. I thought this was particularly interesting since it's in an urban area and I picture these sort of things only occurring in rural areas for some reason... It was formed in 1998, and completed in 2001. The benefits of self managed communities are really subjective I think. I'm sure some people would love to live in a place that you always see your neighbors whenever you walk outside, and have weekly meals with them. But I am willing to bet there are quite a few people who would feel completely smothered having their neighbors in their business all the time.

These sort of communities definitely do offer some benefits. You can let your kids play outside and there's always somebody watching over them. Living in one of these communities is a great opportunity for teamwork and building strong friendships etc.

In Takoma, they make decions off a consensus basis. Even if people know eachother very well, I imagine its incredibly hard to get much done if all decions are consensus based, because sometimes, people just have fundamentally different beliefs that won't be changed.I think this is one limitaiton.This leads to another possible limitation which is homogeneyity among residents, which I don't think is a great idea. I mean, imagine growing up in a little village filled with people just like you, who think the same as you etc? I don't imagine it leads to much appreciation of diversity... I don't know. I've never lived in anything like this, so clearly I don't really know.

11/05 discussion

I looked at the Duwamish Cohousing Community in West Seattle. They have  25 households on 2.7 acres of land. There is no joining fee but there is a monthly fee determined by the size of the home. On their website, they claim to share these values: Community, Diversity, Land/Environment, decisions making, group activities, and the Large Neighborhood. They share meals 2-5 times a week. Community meeting is once a week. And everyone is required to attend a group meal once a week. This community has been completed since 2001. It has been 7 years, but just from the look of their website, I don't think there has been much growth happening. I really don't see much potential for Duwamish Cohousing.

I am a little skeptical about this idea. It seems a little too socialistic to me. I think the idea sounds very idealistic. I guess we all agree here that communism doesn't work. Yet, I don't see much difference between these kind of communities and communism. Sharing is a great idea, but I don't know if I can handle such close proximity with my neighbors. I am probably too brainwashed by the American ways of life, which means keep to yourself, say hi to your neighbors once a month, or even live somewhere for years and not know your neighbors at all. I think the idea of living together sounds very good. But I really don't think it will work. It's hard enough to live at home with your parents after you've left for college. I can't imagine the kind of drama that would occur in close communities of 30+ adults. I am not going to be hesitate to say that Americans are not ready for this.

Nov. 5 Discussion

Cohousing is a very unique planning method that is slowly gaining more recognition.  I chose to look at the Prairie Onion Cohousing, located in Chicago, IL.  This cohousing group was formed in 2004, but are still in the planning phase.  Their vision for cohousing includes affordability, green building, accessibility to a variety of people (ie disabled, older residents), and of course, connectivity between the residents and community.  This cohousing group's future has been invested by the time and effort they have put in to organize group meetings and other events to bring the Prairie Onion community together during the planning and devlopment phases.  Also, the community is building within the city, to take advantage of the city's public transit system.  Although they are still forming, the group has used the internet as their social network for meeting updates and general information.  The communtiy's future potential seems to be fairly strong, backed by their green building and accessibility to the city's public infrastructure; it appears to have a good blend between the characteristics of a cohousing community and the city. 

The limitations that I foresee for this community, like all cohousing communities, is that they do not allow visitors, unless they have previously contacted someone within the community and schelduled a set time to come.  At first glance, I assumed cohousing communities were more like public neighborhoods, where you can drive through the area and look at the houses, etc.  I feel like eliminating this factor does not allow the general public to fully understand the community.  Having a close-knit community is great; it ups the level of trust and security, but can also close the community to expansion.

Cohousing communities is an interesting concept that has alot of beneficial and unique opportunities.  However, the sense of an exclusionary factor can harm the dynamics of the community, and can sometimes create more problems. 

11/5 Discussion question

I looked over the Blueberry Hill Cohousing Community in Vienna, Virginia.  It was completed in 2001 and has 7 acres.  This cohousing community consists of 19 houses near a vegetable farm where they receive food.  The community is self developed and they own a common house where they eat a couple times a week, throw parties, and use the outdoor spaces.  They have a very diverse membership including origin, religion, profession, age class, and family size.  This cohousing community strives to maintain relationships with all community members.  They achieve this by community projects and meeting as a whole once a month.  Their decision making is by consensus with a leadership group but this group varies.   Some of the future potential for this community is the ability to have relationships with each individual family within this community, so many more families to rely on for help and vice versa.  Some of the limitations could be not enough money to expand the community or people getting tired of the same activities every week or disliking some of the families and they end up leaving the community until the cohousing community dwindles down to only a few families.  The potentials activated by this type of environment is people relying on other people for everything; therefore, the potential danger here is these people not being able to function in society by themselves.  Somebody who relies on somebody for everything and can’t do anything for themselves has problems. 

11/5 Discussion Post

I looked at Hearthstone Cohousing in Denver, Colorado.  This community was completed in 2002 and contains 33 townhomes and a diverse and multi-generational membership (20-80s).  They govern themselves by consensus, and don't have a specific leader, only a steering committee that helps the community move forward. They have a community garden, eat together twice a week, and try to provide food for everyone's preferences.

Based on this community some of the potential for the future of self-managed communities, are the ability to provide what they need for themselves, create a community that suits their needs more than the generic "community" that city governments may create, helps promote neighbor/community unity.  Some of the likely limitations are not being able to have enough money to create things that they want (for example, a school) because the city government may not accept it, possible competition between neighbors about what's "best" for the community, etc.

The set up of the neighborhood activates the potentials of creating more unity within a neighborhood and reclaiming the "traditional know your neighbors" and establishing a time to come together to socialize, yet can maintain professional relations. It also allows for other communal activities (besides dinner), such as a garden, where families can work together to grow food, flowers, etc for the whole community.  Some dangers/limitations that may occur are again, potential "power struggle" in order to create the best community, more work by a few families than others can cause tension, some other groups may argue that they are just another HOA and that they're not any different besides just eating together, and there may be issues between what the community wants and what the city government wants to do in the area (new construction, etc).

November 5th Disussion Questions

I have read the various sections of the cohousing.org website and looked at a couple co-housing developments in the United States and have come to understand and appreciate their purpose on a much greater level.  From my impression, the most emphasis in put on the collective establishment and management of these types of communities.  Often times, those interested in living in a co-housing community ban together to build it rather than just moving into an already developed community.  Once completed, it is the duty of all members to manage their community and its activities through the Homeowners Association.  The potential that lies within the Homeowners Association is great because it is a representation of all community members that, with few exceptions, share the broad goal of living together through a mutual respect and sense of caring for your neighbors. They do not have the same problems that typically plague a community and have been proven successful by the growing popularity of co-housing communities throughout the world.  I think we will continue to see growth in these styles of communities, especially within America, as people become more conscious of community and the lack thereof in many suburban developments, realize their dependence on the automobile, and strive to live in more environmentally friendly ways.  Co-housing developments address each of these issues, and more, as people of all ages, ethnicities, and religions are welcomed and encouraged to actively live together with their neighbors in hopes of providing such things as a wholesome environment for children, efficient use of natural resources, ample opportunity for intellectual and skill development and a simplified lifestyle.

The main limitation I see for co-housing developments is the slow and tedious development process that often takes years to fully complete.  Because they are not built for profit, but rather from a group of future residents, the planning, construction and completion of these projects is drawn out to ensure everyone is satisfied and all relevant options are considered.  There are several agencies and groups that are available to assist people in the planning and development of a co-housing neighborhood, which certainly helps, but perhaps not enough if it takes a minimum of two to three years on average from the formation of the idea to when it becomes a reality.  I also think that the aim of many co-housing developments seem a bit too idyllic and possibly a little to unrealistic for the everyday American family to relate to.  Although I think we can all agree an increased sense of community and interaction with neighbors is desirable for many, the ambitious aim and goals set up by many of these communities may turn some people off. Overall though, I do like the idea of co-housing neighborhoods and believe they have great potential for fostering a strong sense of community for all residents, which produces many other positive externalities.  I look forward to seeing and hearing about Shadowlake.

Discussion Oct 29. Monroe DT. Part 1.

PART 1

I chose to look at Monroe, North Carolinas DT revitalization effort. I think this is an example of a traditional problem solving charrette they had a series of meetings where specific problems were identified, goals were set, and ideas for achieving those goals were discussed. Since the downtown was in a state of decline, all the participants had a common goal, to help the downtown, which is one of the strategies of a charette. it also seemed to involve a lot of people since it was advertised in the newspaper and people also seemed to feel they had an actual impact on the outcome. Those are also essential strategies to the success of charettes. Furthermore, all the essential ingredients of a charette were present including an identifiable problem (disrepair of dt), user participation (citizens were involved), involvement of professionals (workshops organized by professional designers and a guy named Henry Sandoff), adoption of short and longterm goals (prioritized issues), and a commitment to put recommendations into action (wrote new policies and created visual presentations so people could see that their community would look like).

PART 1

I chose to look at Monroe, North Carolinas DT revitalization effort. I think this is an example of a traditional problem solving charrette they had a series of meetings where specific problems were identified, goals were set, and ideas for achieving those goals were discussed. Since the downtown was in a state of decline, all the participants had a common goal, to help the downtown, which is one of the strategies of a charette. it also seemed to involve a lot of people since it was advertised in the newspaper and people also seemed to feel they had an actual impact on the outcome. Those are also essential strategies to the success of charettes. Furthermore, all the essential ingredients of a charette were present including an identifiable problem (disrepair of dt), user participation (citizens were involved), involvement of professionals (workshops organized by professional designers and a guy named Henry Sandoff), adoption of short and longterm goals (prioritized issues), and a commitment to put recommendations into action (wrote new policies and created visual presentations so people could see that their community would look like).