Silly Walks of Eindhoven: a tribute in graffiti

The Dommeltunneltje (Little Dommel Tunnel) in Eindhoven runs, as the name suggests, parallel to the river Dommel connecting the TU/e university campus with the Fuutlaan on the edge of the Villapark. The route is a designated slow traffic route for pedestrians and cyclists for crossing underneath the large railway yard and platforms at Eindhoven Station and the Professor Doctor Dorgelo Park Way. Thus creating a safe route from the city centre to the university and further into Woensel. The rather bleak concrete construction was graced with a mural depicting a riverside landscape. In the decades that followed the mural completely faded.

The Eindhoven City Council started a program to upgrade public spaces. Part of this effort was an initiative to "make the city more fun". The public servant tasked with public spaces -a fan of outdoor art and especially Banksy- commissioned Studio Giftig to create a new artwork in the tunnel. The 130 metre long graffiti work was made by graffiti artist Niels van Swaemen in collaboration with Kasper van Leek.

To bring a smile to all that pass through the tunnel the Monty Python sketch Ministry of Silly Walks was chosen as the inspiration for the art work. This sketch is one of the best known of the Monty Python team and dates from 1970. Both artist weren't even born yet then, but know the sketch nonetheless as it is a persistent hit on -for instance- Youtube. April 2016 John Cleese officially opened the refurbished tunnel with the art work Silly Walks of Eindhoven.

At either end the face of John Cleese welcomes the visitors and invites them to do some silly walks.

The silly walks are treated as stills from the sketch. Each is reduced to a pose that grace the wall as moments in a silly walk.

Eco-housing, the exception or the norm?

In my work I meet people that have a "green heart" and want to do something positive for nature or the environment. Some of these people even go so far as to want to create an "ecological project". The initiatives seldom amount to much as the economics of such dreams of a better future for one's personal life and the planet don't stack up. This prevents many idealist from completing actual projects. I'm not mentioning this to put down the dreamers amongst us, no, I simply want to draw attention to the divide between what is dubbed "conventional" versus "ecological".

Ecological projects that can be linked to water management are the most easily realised in the Netherlands, as there is standing policy encouraging this. There is also a quid-pro-quo approach in planning which means that if for instance someone wants to develop a site for new housing, this will have to be compensated via the building of "new nature" or an investment in the spatial and natural quality of the landscape on site or in a suitable location earmarked by the planners for so-called blue-green developments.

There are many projects of concerned citizens trying to improve the environment and the future of the planet by setting up projects within the sharing economy, reducing waste, promoting reuse and the circular economy,  cleaner energy, reducing energy consumption and localism. The collection of reusable materials has been well organised with collection points for glass (to be separated by colour), paper, metal, plastics and green waste. And slowly the sharing economy is becoming part of the mainstream. Furthermore many local authorities strongly favour a more durable way of transport and developing offices and housing. Central government also issues directives concerning building standards, energy efficiency for new-builds and remodelled or revamped buildings, reusability of building materials. And the waterboards (Waterschappen) have clear guidelines concerning hydrological impact assessment and hydrological compensation. Developers are now noticing that houses with durability features sell better so nearly all new-builds are fitted with high yield glazing, passive heating, heat exchangers, extra insulation, photovoltaic panels, sun boilers and/or geothermal heating systems.

This is the way forward. As many new-builds that look "conventional" are in fact outperforming the so-called eco-housing, the question arises why there is still the insistence on separating conventional and ecological housing. I think this is in part a sales trick from developers that market their housing with more than minimal durability measures as ecological. This is impossible without creating the impression of a less durable "conventional" option. It is, to my mind, a bit like those washing machines that are all Label A+, A++ and A+++, with  categories down to E on the label. This is less than honest as no machines are sold below label B.

Another factor for emphasising the special status of eco-housing might lie in the people and organisations that are promoting this as part of their perceived shared identity. All the GEN-initiatives are clear examples of this. Where EVA-Lanxmeer tried to create practical solutions imbedded in its spatial and social context, most GEN-initiatives emphasise their peculiar uniqueness and are aimed at only the group of like-minded individuals (e.g. the Dutch Ecovillages).

The earliest durability measures in buildings were strongly technical and most have proven to be non-practical or give less positive results than was first calculated. The houses with a computer controlled ventilation and passive heating turned out to make people sick, as moulds flourished, allergens were constantly reintroduced and no window could be opened. Some people will be attracted to a New-Age commune with the intention of self-sufficiency, most people however are well-willing to do their bit for the planet as long as they can have some sense of continuity of lifestyle and social context. Only a small group can't be swayed by any argument and will choose to be as wasteful and polluting almost out of spite against the concerns of the many...  

I think eco-housing as a separate category is fine, for those for whom it is part of their core identity. This is only a small and well-defined group. For all other people new housing must include best practice concerning durability measures and existing housing should be improved to meet higher standards. Durability measures should be aimed at the majority of people and made mandatory in building regulations and planning. As the conventional looking housing of Westerpark in Breda or In Goede Aarde in Boxtel show, a lot can be done without being too obvious about it.

In the "Magical Garden": a food truck event

The Finnish light artist Kari Kola developed a 360 degrees installation that transformed a dull parking area into an almost magical place. Where at present a parking area is located, there used to be a large villa garden. Some of the trees were kept when the site was paved over. The paved surfaces are ideal to park food trucks to create a large food court. At night the lights instil a sense of place as the trees are highlighted by lighting, thus creating a completely new environment. 

Lighting can transform the way we view and register the urban environment. The light art does create a magical atmosphere. This is further enhanced by the use of log burners which show open flames. In this way an area can change -in a positive way for a change- as darkness descends over the city.

Ecovillages in the Netherlands: Olst, Boekel and Bergen

In the Netherlands there are 12 GEN-initiatives. Only three of them have a location (i.e. they own land for the -prospective- development). These are: Aardhuis Olst, Ecodorp Boekel and Ecodorp Bergen. Most initiatives for ecovillages and eco housing seem to linger and remain in the planning stage. Aardhuis Olst comprises of 23 earthships 12 of which have walls made from car tyres filled with compacted earth. This construction method is in concurrence with the first earthship constructed in the 1970s by architect Micheal Reynolds in New Mexico. It is a way of upcycling waste materials (but can also be seen as a way of introducing materials previously alien to the local environment).

The Aardehuizen are an experiment made possible by the municipality of Olst-Wijhe who provided a location on the edge of the "durability plus housing estate" of Zonnekamp-Oost (Sun Camp East). The earthships are CO2 neutral houses that are self-sufficient in their water and energy needs. Unlike the regular durable housing this housing experiment  will see 25 dwellings constructed with no connection to amenities (sewer, mains gas and electricity).

The layout of the almost completely realised (2012) ecovillage in Olst with all the buildings angled south, facing the sun. On the north side the earthships are covered by an earth bank. There is one vacant lot (VL) for the last two-family dwelling. The strict order is reminiscent of New Objectivity projects and very useful in not wasting space. There is room for parking (P) near the entrance as the earthships can only be reached on foot or bicycle. At the hart sits a work and living commune dubbed the Middle House (MH). The earthships have 2, 3 or 4 housing units each. Next to the houses an area has been set aside for permaculture gardens (PCG) and a public park (PP).

After years of existing as an online community and collective goal, Ecodorp Brabant acquired a site with the help of the local council in a transformation area on the edge of the existing village in 2014. Most of this initiative consists of organising seminars, events and design workshops for students of architecture. The plan is to build 3 circles of 10 linked dwellings -creating the shape of a flower- with a large aquaponic polydome to provide food for the residents. The development has now (2016) started with the building of a tiny house (35 square metres floor space).

The layout of the planned ecovillage in Boekel shows a distinctive pattern which puts it firmly in the same category as utopian architecture, but also Corbusian schemes. The design is clearly made by an architect who favours expressing an overarching message via the shapes chosen. The plan will result in an isolated community not integrated spatially or functionally into the neighbouring village. The plan is also very wasteful of space with all the flowing "natural" lines.

Ecodorp Bergen is another example of an ecovillage. This initiative was instigated by an architect who participated in public consultation regarding a former military site in a polder on the edge of the village of Bergen, Holland. This so-called MOB-complex started as a WW2 airstrip and was later used as a mobilisation complex for reservists during the Cold War Period. The Dutch Ministry of Defence has been selling these often isolated sites off since the 1990s. The site comprised of an airstrip and several bunkers, all enclosed by dense greenery.

The basic goal for the new ecovillage sound almost religious: "a community where people respectfully live together in harmony, in loving connection to one another, the earth, the cosmos and with room for everyone to develop their personal qualities." Also there should be "a transition from the individual materialist society to a durable communal and above all local society." The idea is to build durable housing for some 80 residents, build workshops for artists, create space for theatre, music, dance, exhibitions and self-expression. A restaurant, shop, thrift store, space for seminars and healing and communal facilities are also p[art of the plan. Furthermore there should be space for recreation, animals, permaculture gardening, water purification and generating durable energy. The aim is to be -almost- self-sufficient.

The ecovillage is a citizens' initiative, but they get help from the local authority in realising their dream. The MOB-complex of about 15 hectares was bought by a foundation that worked with crowd funding to raise the funds. The foundation will own the site including all future buildings. There will be no private ownership! In 2015 the existing military buildings (10.000 m2) and platforms were demolished. A large part of the green mantle will be removed to create open grassland with watercourses. I suppose this is a way of integrating the site in the surrounding polder, but in the flat grassy polders high trees are of greater ecological value than more of the same, i.e. grass and water.

The sketch plan for the ecovillage in Bergen -redrawn here- shows an amorphous approach with "natural shapes" and a clear aversion to straight lines. This denies both the position in a polder and the history of the place and is also very wasteful creating lots of small pieces of land. The ecovillage proper (EV) sits next to a nature conservation area (NCA) with an eco camping (EC) where the two meet. Within the ecovillage there is space reserved for communal facilities (CF) and workshops (W). Around the housing permaculture gardens are planned. The whole layout reminds me of African hut circles and stone age settlements.

I think it is a shame that all these ecovillages are not real villages as the name suggests, but rather small, seperate communities of people geared towards communal living and working, with a striking preference for the arts, new age (group) activities, self-sufficiency, permaculture and aquaponics. From an urban design standpoint only the ecovillage Olst is successful, the other two are to wasteful with space with either no clear spatial definition (ecovillage Bergen) or a strong evocative shape that can't truly be appreciated on the ground (ecovillage Boekel). Why, for instance, was the defunct landing strip not used in the ecovillage Bergen to create a spatial anchor? Why are all these initiatives so inward-orientated and thus spatially exclusive? Is it really necessary to emphasise and perpetuate a distinction between traditional and ecological, or is this a method of self justification for those involved to give more weight to their own convictions?

Eco housing: Ecovillages in Europe and beyond

There are several initiatives on environmental friendly housing. Most of these are initiated by private parties and not by governments, corporations or institutions. Examples of the latter include the Solarsiedlungen of North-Rhine Westphalia, Stad van de Zon (Sun City) in Heerhugowaard and the Westerpark Estate in Breda. The non-institutional initiatives can range from experimental architecture (the Housing Expo in Almere), to individuals building their dream home or even earthship and groups of people that join up to realise their ideals for a better (living) environment. A famous bottom-up project is EVA-Lanxmeer in Culemborg the Netherlands. An example of a mixed project is In Goede Aarde in Boxtel, where several environmental organisations and groups of concerned citizens worked with the local authority to create a normative sustainable housing estate.

Both projects were a great inspiration for other groups wanting to recreate this. Few such estates were actually realised, and non at the scale of EVA-Lanxmeer. So these initiatives are rather an eco neighbourhood of a cluster of houses than an entire housing estate. The small housing project De Buitenkans again in Almere with 55 wood frame buildings is a good example. Many of the new initiatives are part of the GEN-Europe network. Most have been started, but still remain unrealised.

The Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) was set up in 1995 to: "support the experimental creation and preservation of human settlements that not only sustain, but regenerate their social and natural environments." The aim is to create: "communities with vibrant social structures, vastly diverse, yet united in common ecological, economic, social and cultural values and goals." The GEN-website formulates many goals and seems to be a pick and mix for potential participants. This is, to my mind, a positive thing to ensure not only a very narrow demographic participates. Eco housing must go beyond the communes of  sandal-wearing vegan activists intent on sustaining themselves if it is ever to become truly successful!

A map of the GEN-Europe project (based on the map on their website). There are some clear clusters of initiatives with Luxemburg, Poland, the Balkans and much of the Baltic, France, Britain and Ireland without any.

A myriad of projects is part of the GEN-Europe network. These include both urban and rural initiatives, permaculture, ecotourism, education centres and transition projects including greening existing villages. Most of the realised project comprise of community groups or even communal living. GEN-Europe is actively promoting "social resilience, environmental pro­tection and restoration of nature through the concept of ecovillages as models for sustainable human settlements." Changing lifestyles, reducing the carbon footprint per capita and local ownership of a sustainable future within a holistic approach are at the core of what GEN tries to realise with a European network of ecovillages. A bottom-up approach is also emphasised by stressing co-development and co-design.

The so-called Global Ecovillage Movement started in the early 1990s. Ross and Hildur Jackson, the founders of Gaia Trust (an ecologically focused charitable entity based in Denmark), concluded that to further the “movement towards sustainability” as they felt the world needed “good examples of what it means to live in harmony with nature in a sustainable and spiritually-satisfying way in a technologically-advanced society”. It was decided that GEN would have three regional networks to cover the globe geographically with administrative centres at The Farm (Americas), Lebensgarten (Europe) and Crystal Waters (Oceania). The movement is strongly rooted within permaculture. As such GEN promotes projects that enforce the distinction between a regular way of living and their proposed eco-friendly community model making the ecovillage only obtainable for a small section of society outside of the mainstream.

This makes many of these eco-projects elitists and geared towards educated, like-minded individuals who can afford to live their chosen lifestyle. It would be much more productive to lobby for the improvement of building standards, influence planning regimes that often favour less sustainable developments or come up with ideas usable in industrial processes to reduce waste, explore the possibilities of biobased materials and energy efficiency. Personally I'm all in favour of always choosing the most environmental-friendly material and making clear choices especially in urbanisation and (agricultural) production. No-one can change the world for the better by merely being smug about their own choices as this makes these idea(l)s easy to dismiss!