urban farming big & small

Lu Seng Kiat [15416139] A CATALOGUE OF URBAN AGRICULTURE TYPOLOGIES

Assignment

RESEARCH SPECIFIC CONTEXT

Title: A CATALOGUE OF URBAN AGRICULTURE TYPOLOGIES

Name: LU SENG KIAT

Student Number: 15416139

Unit Name: ARCHITECTURAL SPECIAL TOPIC 651

Email Address: [email protected]

Date Submitted: 07/05/2012

Word Count: 2000 ( excluding bibliography and figure commentary)

URL (if applicable):

Curtin University of Technology

By submitting this assignment, I declare that I have retained a suitable copy of this assignment, have not previously submitted this work for assessment and have ensured that it complies with

university and school regulations, especially concerning plagiarism and copyright.

___________________________

(07/05/2012)


A CATALOGUE OF URBAN AGRICULTURE TYPOLOGIES


CONTENT

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... 4

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 5

DISSERTATION BACKGROUND ................................................................................... 6

PROPOSITION ............................................................................................................................ 6

CHALLENGES ............................................................................................................................. 6

RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................ 7

METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 7

TYPOLOGY STUDIES .................................................................................................... 8

1. FACADE .............................................................................................................................. 8

2. ART INSTALLATION ........................................................................................................... 9

3. HORIZONTAL GROUND .................................................................................................... 9

4. VERTICAL TOWER COMPLEX ........................................................................................ 10

5. CONTINOUS INFRASTURED LANDSCAPE ................................................................... 11

CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 12

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 13

IMAGE ........................................................................................................................................ 13

APPENDIX .................................................................................................................... 15


ABSTRACT Urban agriculture is a thriving urbanism trend in search for new paradigm shift worldwide. The

paradigm shift responds to demanding food security and well-being of city dwellers and farmers

by reconciling food production, distribution and consumption(Weller 2009). Emerging as a new

typology, urban agriculture transcends the food production role into revitalizing social spaces and

transforming the gastronomic culture within city to productive urban scape. Urban Agriculture, as

the prototype community catalyst, informs the significance of food system cycle in constructing

urban landscape. The intent for this report is to catalogue and analyze extensive range of urban

farming architecture typology and concluding with social outcomes of each implementation.

“In a survey conducted for the United Nations, cities worldwide already produce one-third of the

food consumed by their residents on average. This percentage is likely to grow in coming

decades, given that the need for urban agriculture could be greater now than ever before.”

Halweil, B. ,Nierenberg,D. 2007. State of the World 2007 Report. Washington Worldwatch

Institute.


INTRODUCTION

Urban Agriculture can be defined according to United Nation as “an industry that produces

processes, and markets food and fuel within a town, city or metropolis on land and water

dispersed throughout the urban and peri-urban area,”(Pires 2011) (Fig.1 ) a continuum from small

backyard garden to medium city farm to large vertical farms and ultimately landscape urbanism.

Many densely populated cities such as Singapore, Tokyo and Shanghai are securing 30% of their

food demand through urban agriculture.(Weller 2009)Thus, this report aims to study and analyze

the typologies of both conceptual and practical architectural propositions for urban agriculture

specific background studies in term of feasibility and limitation studies. This report is divided into

2 primary parts; the first summarizes my dissertation background and its challenges, the second

provides analysis on methodology and scale of urban agriculture architecture. The report ends

with a conclusion of the research outcome including its significance to my future dissertation.


DISSERTATION BACKGROUND

PROPOSITION

This focus research is closely related to my dissertation proposition titled “Urban Agriculture:

Designing edible and yielding urban scape as community catalyst in Western Australia”. It aims to

explore the application of urban agriculture in Western Australia urban setting and its role as

primary ordering device for local food system cycle and as civic regeneration. The dissertation will

focus on the significance of reintegration of urban agriculture into cities. Reintegration is of priority

than tabula rasa approach as demonstrated in romanticized historic model. Based on “Boomtown

2050: Scenario for Rapid Growing City” by Richard Weller, my dissertation contemplates on the

horizontal urban scenario, Food City discussed in the book and explores transformation of

existing urban fabric into both agricultural and communal productive environment.

CHALLENGES

What is the potential place for reintegration of food production in contested spaces in

city?

Urban Zoning vs Urban Farming. What are the planning restrictions and bylaws relevant

to medium scale and large scale urban agriculture? Is amendment necessarily for

realization of reintegrating agriculture in existing urban setting?

How will this revived architectural typology affecting on our already dense cities and built

forms once urban farming is implemented extensively?

What are the implications of this social paradigm shift from consumer to co-producer?

How can urban agriculture counteract gentrification of urban space caused by

gastronomic culture and improve democratic social spaces


RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT

METHODOLOGY

METHOD

SCOPE OF STUDIES

Literature Review

Textual analysis on theoretical background of urban agriculture

published by initiative groups, architects and environmental

scientist.

Pictorial and

diagrammatic

Analysis

Investigates the core idea of various urban agriculture

propositions. This method is the key to visualize each strategy

discussed in this report in concise manner.

Comparative

Studies

Identifies the similarities and differences in each catalogued

components in term of scale, context, feasibility


TYPOLOGY STUDIES

1. FACADE

Urban agriculture is implemented in the smallest scale where building roof and façade often

become the medium. Windowsills, balconies and rooftop are always underused architectural

components and present natural space for urban agriculture (Doron 2005). Due to its low

economic demand and „natural presence‟, it doesn‟t require intense engineering input and utilises

conventional potting growing herbs and vegetables.

Relating to windowsill, The Window Farm (Fig. 2) allows small scale farming through recycled

plastic bottle(Gorgolewski 2011). Besides that, Bohn and Viljoen Architects designed a compact

and high yield hydroponic farming suspended as curtain in the interior (Fig. 3). for London Yields

2009 Exhibition (Gorgolewski 2011). Enlarged Urban Agricultural Curtain (Fig. 4) by Kiss &

Cathcart Architects, New York targets the omnipresent curtain wall in city office building,

sandwiched between curtain wall glass panes as solar filter (Fig. 4). Both micro-urban agriculture

addresses home oriented green initiatives without floor space consumption at the same time offer

solar and privacy solution. The Food Chain (Fig.5) by EOA studio abandons the idea of

transparent wall container but still utilising existing infrastructure. The project is conceived as a

network of continuous vertical farming walls of 180 growing panels, catered for the homeless and

poorer community. Demographic urban space is generated here where food source is not socially

exclusive as prefab kitchen is provided for food preparation. The reintegration at this scale is

highly plausible as community regeneration and rehabilitation of unused urban space.

The repetition of planting on balconies could easily become a prominent architectural feature of a

building. Such strategy can transform a small scale urban agriculture into large scale vertical

farm, which is evident in the under construction Bosco Verticale (Vertical Forest) (Fig. 6) by

Stefano Boeri in Milano Italy.

In the case of rooftop, such type of urban agriculture is most popular in dense urban area,

particularly in Sweden and Germany where rooftop farm are planning requirements (Doron 2005).

Rooftop intervention comes either in the form of economic large panting boxes and pots or costly

natural soil for planting. This simplistic approach is nonetheless an instant community catalyst

creating participatory social space (Doron 2005), as exemplified in John Puttick‟s graduate project

entitled “The Land of Scattered Seeds” (Fig. 8). A simple conversion of mentioned components

into farming tools which in turn creates a dispersal of similar conversion in the community. Harlem

community rooftop farm, New York by EOA studio, presents an oblique solution to flat rooftop

farm with built in planter boxes for community uses.


2. ART INSTALLATION The pavilion type urban agriculture addresses the idea of transient place within urban fabric and

creation of social space through augmented landscape. It embraces pragmatic approach both in

function and economic often conceived in medium scale. The nature of transient is translated in

its primary role as eventscape with artistic evocation (Andraos 2010). Public Farm 1 (Fig. 9) by

WORK Architecture in New York MOMA translates urban agriculture into a sculptural installation

piece, which is the primary direction of my dissertation. The pavilion type here still utilises low

tech farming using soil filled in structural cardboard tubes. Zones designated with specific

programs such as harvesting tube, seatings, play area, farmers‟ market and service areas, urban

agriculture architecture can be a platform for urban play. The idea of demographic space within

gastronomic culture (Parham 2005) resembles the one proposed in Food Chain. Farmscape

(Fig.10) by UMAMI-UTILITIES installed in Hong Kong Biennale also imagines a transient

prosthetic landscape, targeting the imagination of public where the dia-grid field allows local crops

planting. Both of these pavilion type are provocative in term of mediating between gastronomic,

productive and artistic space. As the modules of such approach are replicable just as the

component types, the potential of expansion is huge to increase yield.(Viljoen 2005)

3. HORIZONTAL GROUND

Grounded urban agriculture is the most practiced in the form of allotments, community gardens

and small city farms. City farms are legacies of Garden City Movement as well as the Post War

high demand for food security. In Germany and US, the nostalgic role of allotment gardening

similar to Australian suburban backyard has changed from food production to recreation after the

war. This form requires the least design input as many stem from the collective efforts and often

conceived informally. It appears as urban reclamation as empty lots or wasted industrial plots are

cultivated and maintained by a communal initiative. They are self-sufficient and suitable for

animal breeding and any local vegetables, capable to support a small community.

Their primary role is community integration and revitalisation rather than food production (Doron

2005), often contributing to urban agro tourism, notably London‟s city farm (Fig.11).Due to the

lack of infrastructure; they are often testing grounds or nursery for other forms of urban

agriculture such as roof top farm and vertical farms. Despite the lack of flexibility, city farms often

become an integral part of urban fabric, supported by farmer‟s market or a greenhouse.


4. VERTICAL TOWER COMPLEX

The hypothetical vertical farms are pioneered by Dr. Dickson Despommier of Columbia

University, which consists of hydroponic farms located within a curtain walled skyscraper to feed

up to 50,000 people (Despommier 2010). The proposals (Fig. 12 & Fig.13) in collaboration with

the Urban Design Programme (Doron 2005) are envisioned solution to sustainable city living and

profitable development with engineered environment improving food security and safety. The all

year round harvesting through renewable energy (recycled water and solar power) is perhaps one

of the competent features in vertical farming (Fig 14.). Dr. Despommier‟s concept plays an

prominent pacer in reintegration of agriculture in architecture. The main concern of urban

agriculture falls nonetheless on the scarcity of land within urban area for conventional farming,

followed by the capacity to feed a city population within limited site where housing and

commercial usage are firstly considered than agriculture (Pires 2011). This is evident the

burgeoning of informal urban farms at small scale on empty lots as demonstrated in United

States. Thus vertical farming remains competent dealing with urban program and zoning

requirement. The dispersed form of Australian cities particularly in Western Australia provides

reasonable land for vertical farming intervention.

Similar approach is being adopted by Oliver Foster, ODESIGN, and Australia in their stackable

vertical farm (Fig.14) which includes gastronomic spaces (café and restaurants) (Despommier

2010). HARVEST (Fig.15) by Romses Architects similarly is mechanised agricultural

infrastructure, encompassing aquaculture and poultry. An earlier model, Pig City (Fig.16) of 72

towers by MVRDV, stemmed from similar scenarios, is designed to cope with pork demand in

Netherlands and exports (Doron 2005). Dragonfly Tower by Vincent Callebaut Architecture

(Fig.17) in the form of marinas for aquacultures and stacked farms takes Despommier‟s concept

to a near science fiction. These highly conceptual designs though bold deem to be possible

architectural flop in term social outcomes and predicted sustainability as demonstrated in Le

Corbusier‟s Radiant City. The densification of urban agriculture raises serious question on human

scale and sustainability viability as the out of context solitaire denies any contextual relevance

and possible community building.

Alternatively, vertical farms can be in form of mixed use complexes which is more feasible as

done by Weber Thompson Architects in Seattle prototype (Fig.18). The complex accommodates

stacked hydroponic farms, grey water remediation inclusive of residential, education, retail and

research facilities (Despommier 2010). The integrated design is sounder and community oriented,

compared to monumental towers but does it still address the concept of reintegration of urban

agriculture navigating the planning restrictions? The vertical farm due to its massive construction,


faces severe financial and resources limitations on already drained planet, which it fails to justify

with its predicted food and sustainability benefits (Despommier 2010).

5. CONTINOUS INFRASTURED LANDSCAPE Continuous Productive Urban Landscapes (CPULs) (Fig. 19) are essentially a sprawling form of

urban agriculture proposed by Ander Viljoen and Katrin Bohn in 2004 for London. Here, the

productive spaces acts a traversing link to unify site of food production and consumption and also

bleeding into city-fringes where mixed use development for farming is incorporated (Gorgolewski

2011), readdressing a subtle integration of urban design and agriculture (Viljoen 2005). This is

supported by urbanist, Carolyn Steel stating that “Food shapes cities, and through them, it

moulds us – along with the countryside that feeds us”. Continuous landscape aims to “ transform

barren urban landscapes into edible landscapes.”(Gorgolewski 2011). The environmental quality

of CPUL will bleed into habitable sites along the path, transforming them a productive one. As a

result, a large scale urban agriculture is created on most unsuspected sites such as the

brownfield sites and car parks around supermarkets (Doron 2005). . Farmadelphia (Fig. 20) by

Front Studio, adopts similar reclamation on overgrown lots and vacant buildings by injecting

farmlands. This type echoes the influence of Ebenezer Howard (Fig. 21) Garden City and Frank

Llyod Wright‟s (Fig. 22) Broadacre City reconciles food production and urban development.

CUPLs is not defined only by linearity and physical connectivity (Viljoen 2005), rather a network

of common scattered urban agricultural elements. It is essentially both centralized and

decentralized. A variant form of CPUL is exercised further in Ravine City/ Farm City by Chris

Hardwicke in Toronto(Fig. 23)


CONCLUSION

Recognizing the vast scope of possible urban agricultural design, the typology can still be

classified according to scale and nature of their implementation. Each class embodies a

significant architectural feature without comprising the key of urban agriculture. From the personal

micro scale, the restriction is limited by creativity to utilize materials and space. Though the yield

is low, in collective, it can contribute to medium or even large scale construct. The PF 1 pavilion

type is of particular interest as a direction to explore considering the balance between human

scale and the capacity to produce local food as compared to vertical farms and landscape

urbanism which presents monumental construction especially in existing dense urban fabric. At

all scale, urban agriculture‟s social and environmental benefits (Fig. 24). are justified however

the key is still in the implementation through reintegration and appropriate of scale.


BIBLIOGRAPHY Andraos, A., Wood, D. 2010. Above the Pavement - The Farm. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Despommier, D. 2010. The Vertical Farm : Feeding the World in the 21st Century. New york: Thomas Dunne Books/ St. Martin's Press. Doron, G. 2005. Urban Agriculture: Small, Medium, Large. In AD Architectural Design : Food + the City London: Wiley Academy. Gorgolewski, M., Komisar, J. and Nasr, J. 2011. Carrot City - Creating Places for Urban Agriculture. New York, United States: The Monacelli Press. Parham, S. 2005. Designing the Gastronomic Quarter. In AD Architectural Design : Food + the City London: Wiley Academy. Pires, V. 2011. Planning for Urban Agriculture Planning in Australian Cities. Queensland, Australia: Griffith University. Viljoen, A., Bohn,K., and Howe, J. 2005. Continuous Productive Urban Landscapes: Designing Urban Agriculture for Sustainable Cities. London, England: Architectural Press / Elsevier. Weller, R. 2009. Boomtown 2050: Scenario for Rapid Growing City. Western Australia: UWA Publishing.

IMAGE Figure 1: www.stephensplanning.com/agri_urban_spectrum.pdf (Accessed 20

th April 2012)

Figure 2: http://www.naturallyearthfriendly.com/sites/default/files/window-farms-diagram

hydroponics-system.jpg (Accessed 30th April 2012)

Figure 3: http://www.blueprintmagazine.co.uk/index.php/architecture/london-yields-urban-

agriculture/ (Accessed 30th April 2012)

Figure 4: http://alexwebb.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/201001091113-1.jpg (Accessed 30th

April 2012)

Figure 5: http://www.eoarch.com/work/architecture/community/food-chain.html

(Accessed 2nd

May 2012 )

Figure 6: http://www.stefanoboeriarchitetti.net/?p=207 (Accessed 2nd

May 2012 )

Figure 7: http://www.eoarch.com/work/architecture/community/harlem-community-rooftop-

farm.html (Accessed 2nd

May 2012 )

Figure 8: (Doron 2005, 55)

Figure 9: http://www.archdaily.com/708/ps1-young-architects-program-2008-work-architecture-

company/ (Accessed 2nd

May 2012 )

Figure 10: http://www.dezeen.com/2010/01/06/more-photos-of-shenzhen-and-hong-kong-

biennale/ (Accessed 2nd

May 2012 )



Figure 13: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21153990/ns/technology_and_science-

innovation/t/could-these-be-farms-future/#.T6cqYsVrgdT (Accessed 2nd

May 2012 )


Figure 14 http://www.odesign.com.au (Accessed 3rd

May 2012 )

Figure 15: http://www.romsesarchitects.com (Accessed 3rd

May 2012 )

Figure 16: (Gorgolewski 2011)p.57

Figure 17: http://www.vincent.callebaut.org (Accessed 3rd

May 2012 )

Figure 18: http://wwwweberthompson.com (Accessed 3rd

May 2012 )

Figure 19: (Viljoen 2005)

Figure 20: http://inhabitat.com/farmadelphia/ (Accessed 3rd

May 2012 )

Figure 21: http://www.library.cornell.edu/Reps/DOCS/howard1.gif (Accessed 3rd

May 2012 )

Figure 22: http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kvshpk1YRO1qzgusyo1_500.jpg

(Accessed 3rd

May 2012)

Figure 23: (Gorgolewski 2011)p.30-31

Figure 24: Author‟s work, 2012


APPENDIX

Figure 1: Agricultural Urbanism Spectrum Diagram.

This diagram acts as a guide in establishing the research scope by selection significant architectural typology rather than landscape. It shows the changing definition and

increasing scale of urban agriculture.

Figure 2: Window farm

Micro-hydroponic system

using plastic soda bottle filled with spiked water. Such small component presents a unique approach to integrate farming

in architectural component starting from personal living

space.


Figure 3: Urban Agriculture Curtain

A suspended vertical

structure for growing salads and herbs to be harvested

consumption in the café where it is situated.

Figure 4: Large scale Urban Agriculture Curtain wall

.


Figure 5: The Food Chain by EOA Studio, New York

Insertion of vertical garden

panels into existing neighborhood building can act as urban revitalization

especially for poor community, where spatial gentrification is dissolved.

Figure 6: Vertical Forest by Stefano Boeri

It exemplifies the potential in

repetition of farming balconies in creating a

vertical farms, despite the micro scale of the original

element.


Figure 7: Harlem Community Roof Farm by

EOA Studio, New York

.

Figure 8: The Land of Scattered Seeds, 2003,

Graz, Austria by John Puttick

The project shows how food

production serves as sustainability and community

catalyst through a narrative of two brothers converting their

house architectural components into farms, gardens and vineyards,

leading to improved community interaction.


Figure 9: Public Farm (PF1), 2009 at MoMA , New York by WorkARC,

The PF 1 is regarded to rare breed of agriculture and architecture in oblique form. With simple cardboard tube construction as planter container and program core, it accommodates the public at

human scale while meeting the food production for a small community. As transient structure, it fails to provide a permanent solution in long term urban agriculture. The appropriateness of scale and spatial

flexibility does question the pragmatism in large scale vertical farm.


Figure 10: Farmscape, 2010,Hong Kong Biennale byUMAMI-UTILITIES

Figure 11: London City Farm. It is built on empty green site at the edge of a park and church yard,

serving mainly as educational and recreational purposes. Farm animals are bred with a plot for herbs.


Figure 12: Verical Farm,2004, Columbia University by Andrew Kranis and Dr. Dickson Despommier.

This is one of the first multistorey self- sustaining vertical farms developed by Dr. Despommier, capable of

wide range of agriculture from herbs to animals. The mega structure is predicted to feed a medium sized city. It embodies a closed loop system where waste and water is recycled and reused and conveniently

connected to food distributor, markets.

Figure 13: Cylindrical Verical Farm, 2004, Columbia University by Chris

Jacob and Dr. Dickson Despommier.

The cylindrical glazed tower accommodates high yield hydroponic

system and mounted with solar disc for energy gain. Such approach is speculated

to be extremely efficient in groups. However, the alienating appearance

doesn‟t contribute to urban coherence. Perhaps this compromise is justifiable with

its functionality.


Figure 14: Vertical Farm in Australia by ODESIGN


Figure 15. Harvest Project, 2009, Vancouver by Romses Architects

The proposal fully adopts the essence of harvest translating the program into a highly

industrialized environment in the form of stacking containers. Is this the only viable way to construct a productive skyscraper, resembling almost like any existing factories?


Figure 16. Pig City,2001, Netherlands by MVRDV

A high rise condominium for pigs seems to fail at addressing the economy and human dwelling demands which are also critical issues worldwide.


Figure 17. Dragon Fly Vertical farm, 2010, New York by

Vincent Cellabaut

A massive climatic greenhouse, incorporated

with residential and civic space does express futuristic

optimism but how feasible it is to invest the scarce resources

in such massive structure?

Figure 18. Prototype vertical farm complex , 2010, Seattle by Weber

Thompson Architects

The moderate scale resembles the contemporary office complex.

However, the residential inclusion and social hub addresses the issue of

social integration through urban agriculture. The scale and density of

program makes this design more viable and more contextual in term of

contemporary Seattle City.


Figure 19. Continuous Productive Urban Landscape, 2004,London by Ander Viljoen and Katrin Bohn

.


Figure 20. Farmdelphia, London by Front Studio

This design adopts the idea of infill dealing with urban voids. It basically dissolves the segregation between natural and artificial – urban farm bleeds through empty lots. This

increases the availability of local products, through entrepreneurship and community group

.


Figure 21. Garden Cities Movement Diagram by

Ebenezer Howarc

Integration of landscape, agriculture and urbanism can be

traced back as early as 1902.

.

Figure 22. Garden Cities Movement Diagram by

Ebenezer Howarc

Integration of landscape, agriculture and urbanism can be

traced back as early as 1902.

.


Figure 23. Ravine City,Toronto by Chris Hardwicke and Hai Ho

The Ravine City is urban agriculture through augmented landscape. Similarly to CPUL, the extensive farm corridor served by roads and building. The terraced

development is designed to return the ravine to their original state, a kind of restoration. The feature responds to the idea of natural ravine setting to filter

water before it reaches the creek. Here, roof farming component is the heart of urban agriculture

.


Figure 24. Urban Agriculture as ordering device diagram .

urban farming big & small

Documents