Skip to main content

Grace

 

DOME VILLAGE: COMBATING HOMELESSNESS AND URBAN DECAY IN LOS ANGELES

Background and Philosophy

A resident maintains Dome Village's common yard.
A resident maintains Dome Village’s common yard.

Dome Village was a utopian community founded in 1993 in downtown Los Angeles by Ted Hayes, a prominent activist for civil rights and for the homeless. As part of its mission was to fight urban decay, the commune was constructed in a neglected parking lot near a freeway. This parking lot abutted an existing homeless camp, making Dome Village a simple and natural next move for a group of homeless men and women. The location of Dome Village within the heart of a large city is notably different than some of the back-to-the-earth communes we have studied, but its situation made sense considering that it catered to an urban homeless population. Dome Village was intended to provide a transitional community for roughly 30 homeless people not yet ready to live in a traditional home environment. Residents paid $70 a month to live in the commune, and in return shared chores, such as community gardening, that were intended to foster self-empowerment, self-reliance, and responsibility. Hayes’ ultimate goal was to replicate many such communities around the country, as the assembly of the domes was quick, cheap, and space-efficient.

 

Architecture

The interior of Dome Village.
The interior of Dome Village.

Dome Village was particularly well-known for its architectural creativity; it consisted of a collection of twenty domes designed by architect Craig Chamberlain. These domes were assembled from fiberglass panels, and some served as individual or family homes, while others served as communal spaces such as common rooms, kitchens, bathrooms, and laundry rooms. While communes are generally known for their highly “communal” nature, the unique structure of the domes also allowed for a level of privacy among community members. The domes’ prominent location and architecture, coupled with their bright white plexiglass exteriors, was intended to draw attention to the community, and, by extension, to the issue of homelessness in America.

 

Initial Success

Dome village from the exterior.
The parking lot in which Dome Village was situated.

At first, Dome Village appeared quite successful. Michael Dear, a geography professor at the University of Southern California, conducted a study a few months into the life of the commune to assess its success. He surveyed residents of Dome Village as well as employees of nearby businesses. Employees reported feeling safer with the knowledge that a portion of the local homeless population was settled in a residential community, and Dome Village residents reported being happy that they were given access to not only basic necessities such as food and shelter, but also to a stable social community. In fact, the community even boasted six “graduates” who, after some time in Dome Village, chose to leave the commune to pursue stable jobs, reconnect with family, etc. Dear’s survey of community members’ goals revealed that over half of residents’ short-term goals were related to the success of the village and/or the establishment of similar villages elsewhere, highlighting the success of Dome Village to the extent that residents were invested in their community.

 

The Failure of a Dream

Unfortunately, Dome Village no longer exists, and Ted Hayes’ dream of replicating many such communities around the country was not realized. The Los Angeles commune collapsed in 2006 when rent in the area increased by 700% due to skyrocketing property values in downtown Los Angeles. The dismantled domes were sold on Ebay at roughly $3,000 each, and the proceeds were supposed to go toward the creation of a similar community elsewhere in Los Angeles, which has yet to happen. Even before the financial collapse, however, Dome Village displayed some internal challenges. For instance, Dear’s early evaluation showed that, only a few months after the creation of the commune, two residents were forced to leave the village due to arrests for kidnapping and rape, and three others were asked to leave by the rest of the community members (the reasons were not specified). Furthermore, while it initially seemed promising that so many residents prioritized the success of the village, it became evident that many were prioritizing their participation in the village over their eventual graduation from it. This misconception on the part of the residents of Dome Village’s philosophy also contributed to its downfall.

 

Sources:

Associated Press. “Utopian Dome Village in Downtown L.A. Getting Dismantled.” Daily News,

MediaNews Group, 1 Sept. 2006, www.dailynews.com/2006/09/01/utopian-dome-village-in- 

downtown-la-getting-dismantled/.

“Dome Village.” Www.tedhayes.uswww.tedhayes.us/domevillage/index.html.

Flanzbaum, Ronda. “About the Domes.” Www.tedhayes.us,

http://www.tedhayes.us/domevillage/About_The_Domes.html.

Lin, Rong-Gong. “A Dream Dies as Dome Village Is Dismantled.” Los Angeles Times, LosAngeles Times,

29 Oct. 2006, http://articles.latimes.com/2006/oct/29/local/me-dome29.

Tucker, Carol. “Domestic Life in the Domes.” USC News, 30 May 1994, news.usc.edu/4193/DOMESTIC-

LIFE-IN-THE-DOMES/.