Agri - Urban - Culture

ag r i u r ban culture
Christopher Scappaticci
BA Fine Art, 1993, Kings College

Post-Baccalaureate Teacher Certification,
2001, Kutztown University,
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

of Master of Architecture
We accept this report as conforming to the required standard:
..........................................................
Inge Roecker
..........................................................
Ronald Kellett
The University of British Columbia
School of Architecture + Landscape Architecture
April, 2009
Committee:
Chair:
Inge Roecker MArch, B.E.S., AK BW, principal
ASIRstudio, Associate Professor, School of Architecture + Landscape Architecture, Univ. of British
Columbia
Members:
Joyce Drohan MAIBC LEED AP
James KM Cheng | Architects Inc.
Michael Gordon M.Sc. MCIP
Senior Central Area Planner, City of Vancouver
Chair, Downtown Neighbourhood Integrated
Services Team, Adjunct Professor, School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British
Columbia
Ronald Kellett
Professor of Landscape Architecture
School of Architecture + Landscape Architecture
University of British Columbia
Sustainability means conserving a balance within a system by avoiding depletion
of connected resources or capacities. In architectural terms, this refers to ecological as

well as social, cultural, and economic sustainability. Today, many of our systems are not
sustainable by this definition. Before the industrial age, human civilizations have either
survived or died out according to their ability to live within their means. We are engaged in
ABSTRACT
practices and consuming resources with finite and often foreseeable limits. Many of these
systems are based on a linear input-output model where the input and output streams are
not part of the same larger system. This type of system cannot sustain itself for very long.
With increasing globalization of linear systems, we are faced with the threat of collapse on
an unprecedented scale.

The solution to the problems of globalization will not be a large scale top-down
solution but a collection of local interventions literally at the grass-roots level. We need to
return our lifestyle to the human scale and to re-design our systems to work within their
defined input - output limits. When all of our needs are met locally, within the means of
our particular place, we will be sustainable. We will be able to repair existing damage
and, eventually, regenerate the earths capacity to support life. This project proposes the
broad integration of agricultural systems into architecture as a means of re-establishing
our connection to local food systems for social, cultural and ecological benefit.
ii.
abstract
contents
list of illustrations
acknowledgements
dedication
ii.
iv.
v.
vi.
Introduction
Graduation Project Part 01 - Eat Your Garbage
Graduation Project Part 02 - agri urban culture
CONTENTS
1
2 - 24
26 - 53
Bibliography
Image Credits
54-56
57

iii.
ILLUSTR AT I O N S
05
Food Miles
06
Maslows Hierarchy of Needs
07
Residential Energy Use
08
Linear System Flow
08
Cyclical System Loop
09
Howards Garden City Diagrammatic

Plan No. 3
10
Ville Vert Plan
10
Raised Roadbeds
10
Ville Verte Sections
11
Pig City
12
Vertical Farm
12
Farmadelphia Aerial View
i v.
12
Cow Street
37 Yearly Vegetable Intake (Hydroponic)
12
Hay Bales
38 Space to Grow
12
Grain Fields
39 Percent of Yearly Fruit & Vegetable
12
Sunflowers
Intake Produced on Site by Production
13
Concentric Rings of Sustainability
Method
15
Site Context
40 Residential Ground Level Plan
16
Transit Options
41 Building Integrated Greenhouse Sec-
18
Daily Transit Users by Transit Type
tion Perspective EE, Exterior Social
19
Hierarchy of Form
Space Detail
21
North East View
42 Residential Mid-Level Plan
21
South West View
43 Greenhouse Corridor
22
Summer and Winter Sun Angles
22
Plan Area Calculations
44 Residential Top Level Plan
23
Building Integrated Greenhouse
45 Rooftop Greenhouse Section EE,
29
Site Context
30
Greenways Network
31
Garden Streets
32
Key Plan, Detail
33
Garden Street Section AA

at Station Street
35
36
37
Avg. N. Am. Diet by Food Type,
Section DD Detail
Seating Perspective a
46 Jeavons 100 sf Plot Diagram,

Individual Hex Plot
47 Community Garden Sub-Groupings,

Garden Variation 01, 02, & 03
48 Early Program Model, Ground Level

Programmatic Plan Diagram
Ecological Footprint of Food
49 Early Program Diagram
Production by Food Type
50 Programmatic Section Diagram BB
Space Needed to Produce a Fam-
51 Faade Detail
ilys Yearly Soft Fruit and Vegetable
52 Cultivating Urban Culture
Intake by Production Method
53 Agri-Urban Network
Yearly Vegetable Intake (Biointesive)
Committee:

I would like to thank the members of my thesis committee for your constant sup-
port throughout this project. Your special knowledge, experience and point of view helped
me to expand my understanding of architecture and provides me with an example I can
only hope to emulate.

Extra Special Thanks to Inge: Your unswerving confidence in this project was of
undefinable value to me.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Helping Hands:

Thanks to all of the people who helped with drawings and models, especially
Megan Chalmers, and the other Falling Squirrels: Tim Kindrat, Goran Jakovljevic, Kelly
Gartner, and Kostya Miroshnychenko. Thanks also to Andrea Hoff, Idette de Boer, and
Anne Lam. You rock!
Family:

Thanks to my parents, brothers and sister for continued love and support and
for long flights and phone conversations. Thanks to my wife and wee ones: Renza and
Marcello, for putting up with my absence, but more importantly, my presence during the
last four years.
v.
DEDICAT I O N
v i.
To my wife, Laura:
Without you nothing else would be possible, or desirable.
EAT Y O U R G A R B A G E
Sustainability means conserving a balance within a system by avoiding depletion
of connected resources or capacities. In architectural terms, this refers to ecological as

well as social, cultural, and economic sustainability. Today, many of our systems are not
sustainable by this definition. Before the industrial age, human civilizations have either
survived or died out according to their ability to live within their means. We are engaged in
INTRODU C T I O N
practices and consuming resources with finite and often foreseeable limits. Many of these
systems are based on a linear input-output model where the input and output streams are
not part of the same larger system. This type of system cannot sustain itself for very long.
With increasing globalization of linear systems, we are faced with the threat of collapse on
an unprecedented scale.

The solution to the problems of globalization will not be a large scale top-down
solution but a collection of local interventions literally at the grass-roots level. We need to
return our lifestyle to the human scale and to re-design our systems to work within their
defined input - output limits. When all of our needs are met locally, within the means of
our particular place, we will be sustainable. We will be able to repair existing damage
and, eventually, regenerate the earths capacity to support life. This project proposes the
broad integration of agricultural systems into architecture as a means of re-establishing
our connection to local food systems for social, cultural and ecological benefit.
02

1
RATIONALE

What is Sustainability?
2
PRECEDENTS

E. Howards Garden Cities

LeCorbusiers Green City

MVRDVs Pig City

Columbia Universitys Vertical Farm

Front Studios Farmadelphia3
3
PROJECT PROPOSAL

Assessment Tools

Site Selection

Architectural Issues

Hierarchy of Form

Schematic Explorations

04
09
10
11
11
12
CONTENTS
13
15
17
19
21
03
RATIONA L E

Reestablishing a local food system through
the integration of agriculture into all scales of architectural development is an essential component of a
holistic urban model of sustainability and regeneration.
What is Sustainability?

Sustainability means conserving a balance within a system by avoiding depletion of connected resources or capacities. Sustainability is like
a chain, made of a series of connected parts. No
one link is more important than any other, yet the
chain requires each one of them in order to function.
It would not make sense to make one link stronger
than any of the others because it is the weakest link
that holds the chain together. Just as it would not
make sense to strengthen a single link for the sake
04
of the chain, it does not make sense to strengthen a single component of a sustainable
system while others remain weak. True sustainability requires a holistic approach that
precedes all other decision-making factors. The biosphere of our planet is one system.
And as evidenced by the current climatic crisis, we have shown that local action by an
individual can make an impact due to the principle of scale. For example, if we recycle our
organic waste into compost for agricultural production we will be able to turn our waste into
food and reconnect to the natural processes from which weve spent the last 150 years
unwittingly separating ourselves. Simply stated, we need to change the nature of our action from consumption to production.

The dissolution of local systems in favor of a larger-scale industrialized process
separates the individual from those systems. In the case of our food system, it means
that we are no longer connected in an apparent way with the fulfillment of one of our most
basic needs. With the introduction of highly processed foods, the connection is further
removed, because, our relationship to food has become one of consumer to product and
is subject to economic forces, market influence, and corporate decision. Each of these
ultimately limits the choice of the individual and displaces our control over what we eat.
This encourages passive consumerism in place of active determination of our diet. Due
to peak oil production, petroleum-dependent industrialized farming is compromised and
threatens the security of the worlds food supply. Integrating agricultural production and
architecture provides an opportunity to reestablish our connection to natural systems,
work with neighbors in a common cause, and ensure food security in the future.

In their book, The 100-mile Diet: A Year of Local Eating, Alisa Smith and J.B.
MacKinnon provide an account of their own local eating experience with a self-imposed
100-mile travel limit for their food. Although the figure of 100 miles seems to have been
based more on a hunch than on any quantifiable rationale, it is well below the North American average of 1500 miles for a typical meal (Smith & MacKinnon, 12). The book is more
about the reconnection to active living than it is about greenhouse gas emissions, cheap
oil, or even globalization. They spent much more of their time learning about the foods
they ate, understanding the seasonality of local foods and of the local climatic conditions
that influence sowing, harvesting and storing foodstuffs. Throughout the year they made
a palpable connection to the region in which they live; to the unique and site-specific
qualities of place and community. Most of us could probably transplant ourselves, our
belongings, and our lifestyle to another city without much difficulty. The same TV shows
will be there, the same shopping malls, the same groceries. Smith and MacKinnon have
literally and figuratively cultivated relationships with the food they ate and with those who
produced and distributed it. Their daily life rhythms were in tune with the natural rhythms
of the food system of which they were a part. Their local community became larger with
each new local-food friendship and each farmers market. A similar awareness could be
part of a community that is connected by agricultural programming.

There are conflicting opinions about whether local is actually better. In a Carnegie Mellon University study, reported by the Environmental Science & Technology journal, it is the way that food is produced, rather than the distance it travels, that determines
its environmental impact. The study suggests that a reduction of beef and dairy in ones
diet can have more of an impact on reducing GHGe than eating locally (Engelhaupt,
2008). Conversely, The Food Miles Report, published by the Region of Waterloo Public
Health department in 2005 found that the ingredients of a typical dinner, when bought locally, came from an average of 101km (63mi), while the same ingredients when imported
traveled an average of 5,364km (3,333mi). The report concluded that GHGe could be
reduced by 95% if imported foods were replaced with ones that were locally produced
(Xuereb, 15). Angela Paxton, in her chapter on food miles in CPULs Continuous Productive Urban Landscapes: Designing urban agriculture for sustainable cities., writes that in
addition to the obvious detrimental effects that long distance transport of food imparts in
GHGe, she believes that this type of market has negative implications for the way food
is grown and treated on its journey along the various links in the food chain (Viljoen, 41).
Including the industrial means of using pesticides, fertilizers, and genetically modified
seed stocks; picking food before it is ripe, inhumane livestock practices, and other issues.
The average distance that

our
food
travels
from
farm to fork in North

America is between 1500
and 3000 miles
figure 1a. Food Miles
She believes that this type of disconnection from
ones food leads to consumer ignorance which in
turn allows corporate farmers to perpetrate abuses
to the environment and to animals that would likely
not be tolerated if they were aware of it. According to the UN Environment Program, at least 40,000
people are killed each year and up to 1 million are
made ill or permanently damaged by misuse of pesticides, mostly in developing countries (Viljoen, 45).
Globalized farming negatively impacts small-scale
local farmers who cannot compete in the global
marketplace, leads to the development of monocultures, and impairs the ability of future generations
05
to farm close to home (Viljoen, 41). Pressure for

specialization and modern farming methods mean
that many crop varieties are disappearing: there
were 287 varieties of carrot in 1903, but now only
21. This poses a threat to food security, as the genetic base of our crops is now narrower than it has
ever been, increasing the likelihood of widespread
crop failure, (Viljoen, 44). A local food system also
creates, or supports, a local economy. According to
Paxton, $20 spent on local food is actually worth $50
due to the multiplier effect, where money is spent on
other local goods and services, (Viljoen, 45). Both
Paxton and, Smith & MacKinnon argue that fresh, local, (organic) food is better for you than either fresh
or processed food that comes from further away.
Paxton writes, [over-processed, over-preserved,
and over-packaged foods mean that consumers are
buying foods of low nutritional value, (Viljoen, 45).

While there might be some debate as to the
importance of food miles in determining our food
systems impact on the environment, there are a
multitude of other factors that need to be considered
as well. This debate is an example of why we are
faced with the crisis of global climate change in the
first place. It is taking a single element, food miles,
out of its larger context and looking for a quantifiable
solution to the problem of the system. Sustainability
is not about a single number, or one link of a larger
06
chain, but is part of a holistic, lifestyle approach. We must put the desire for sustainability
at the forefront of all of our decision-making processes to avoid, for example, the redundancies of import-export economies. A local food system can empower the individual
as consumer or producer, and support a local economy. As food is a primal need, the
production, provision and acquisition of it can be profound and provide an opportunity
for feelings of efficacy and connectedness to ones community and the place one lives.
(figure 1a.) Reintegrating agriculture into our urban areas will provide social, ecological,
and nutritional benefits as well as support local economies and food security.
How does the reintegration of a local food system relate to architecture?

The inclusion of agricultural program and infrastructure into architecture provides
an opportunity for synergies among environment, culture, landscape, and built form. The
natural processes of agricultural production support natural and human habitat. With
morality, creativity, spontaneity,
problem solving, lack of prejudice,
acceptance of facts, based in reality
self-actualization
According to this model,
one must satisfy the basic
physiological needs before
being able to satisfy the
more complex emotional,
intellectual and aesthetic
o n e s . (Graphic adapted from J.
Finkelstein)
self-esteem, confidence, achievement,

respect of others, respect by others
esteem
friendship, family, colleagues, neighbors,

sexual intimacy
love / belonging
security of body, of employment, of resources,

of morality, of the family, of health, of property
air, water, food, sleep, excretion, sex
figure 1b. Abraham Maslows Hierarc h y o f N e e d s
safety
physiological needs
a focus on natural and cultivated landscapes as an integral part of the built form, key
mechanical systems, such as ventilation, heating, cooling, waste-water processing, recycling of organic material and energy production, could be augmented or replaced by
self-regulating natural systems. Agriculture is by nature a community activity. Even if a
single person tends a garden, the food they produce is often shared with family, friends,
neighbors or others. Providing space for personal and collective work gives a sense of
shared experience. Community garden plots are often physically close to or connected to
one another, which can lead to the sharing of work, produce or ideas. Space for festivals,
farmers markets and other neighborhood events would be incorporated to encourage
inter and intra-community connections. Seasonal events reinforce a connection to natural
rhythms and provide opportunity for cultural and social traditions to emerge.

Human populations are growing and more of us are living in urban areas than
ever before. The United Nations Human Settlements Programme published a report in
2008 estimating that 60% of the worlds population will be living in or around a city by the
year 2030 (Moreno, i.v.). As cities expand onto agricultural or wild growth lands we will
need to integrate the function of these systems into our urban form in order to maintain
the biospheres capacity to support life. Architectural forms will necessarily be influenced
by the infrastructure needed for this integration, as well as site placement and orientation
toward the elements. At a larger scale, urban form will respond to microclimate, wind
patterns, hydrology, and habitat connections rather than strict adherence to a grid or to
alignment to roadways. Sustainable planning will be long term planning that anticipates
growth and allows for adaptation while designing for permanence. Continual demolition
and renewal type of development, aside from being resource and energy-intensive, creates a culture of impermanence and interrupted memory preventing people from making
deep, lasting connections to place across generations.

Successful urban areas, like New York City maintain a vast number of smaller fullfunction neighborhoods within the larger fabric of the city. Most residents can meet all of
their day to day needs within pedestrian distances and have access to a variety of efficient
COOLING
LIGHTING
5%
3%
14%
APPLIANCES
18%
WATER HEATING
60%
SPACE HEATING
figure 1c. Residential Energy Use

and rapid transit for all farther destinations. Transportation accounts for 26% of all GHGe in Canada.
In Vancouver 61% of all commuters drive less than
10km, 35% drive less than 5km (Statistics Canada).
In addition, gas mileage can be reduced by up to
50% on short trips compared to longer trips, which
means more gas is burned and more GHGe generated. To respond to this, communities need to be
relatively self-contained and provide local opportunities for living, working, shopping, services, etc. In an
integrated agricultural neighborhood, there would be
a variety work opportunities related to food production, preservation and distribution.

According to Daniel E. Williams, buildings
07
IN
THROUGH
OUT
OIL
CONVERSION
GHGe
f i g u r e 1 d . L i n ear System
account for half of CO2 emissions and 76% of power
plant generated electricity in the U.S. (Williams, xvii).
Of this energy, 78% is used for space heating and
water heating (figure. 1c). In a closed loop agricultural system, heat that is recovered from collected
sanitary and other organic waste, as well as the heat
recovered from burning captured biogas, could be
used for space and water heating applications. If
necessary, a solar thermal collection, storage and
distribution system could supplement any additional
need. Infrastructure for distributing the recovered
heat energy would need to be incorporated into
buildings and between buildings for efficient collective use.

The diagrams that follow illustrate the difference between a linear system where input and output capacities are not linked to one another (figure
1d.), and a cyclical systems loop where input and
output capacities are related to one another and to
other systems at different scales (figure 1e.). In the
08
linear system imagine that the input is oil (petroleum), the throughput is its conversion into
electrical or mechanical energy and the output is the GHGe. The capacity to provide oil is
not connected to the capacity of the biosphere to absorb the emissions and therefore does
not provide either feedback or limits on the system as a whole. For example, we still have
a supply of oil but have nearly exhausted the biospheres capacity to absorb the GHGe,
at the present rate. Figure 1e maps out a sample cyclical systems loop of an imaginary
urban agriculture project. In this case, different closed-loop systems relate to one another
and provide feedback and natural limits to the system. For example, if food production
increases, then electricity production increases and more organic waste can be collected
by the trucks, which means more compost and increased food production... Each system
supports every other connected system, provides feedback and natural limits to growth.
Since this means an increased vulnerability as well, measures must be taken to ensure
Food-Waste-Energy Production Loop

Fleet Power
(Electricity or Biogas)
Electricity
Community Power
& Heat Distribution
Heat, Fertilizer
Food Production
(Electricity, Heat,
Water, Fertilizer)
Biogas
Effluent, Compost
Organic Material
Food Consumption
figure 1e. Cyclical Systems Loop
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Farm/Greenhouse Refuse
that the systems can support the residents within a range of input and output scenarios.

The integration of agriculture and architecture can help people and communities
connect to one another, close a loop of organic waste into compost into food, provide work
opportunities close to home, augment the local economy, and work within the capacity of
the site to grow food, generate energy, collect water, and process its organic and sanitary
wastes. There are many contemporary projects and proposals that integrate urban built
form with landscape and agricultural forms, such as MVRDVs Pig City, Front Studios
Farmadelphia, and Columbia Universitys Vertical Farm. However, plans for greening the
modern city have been around for the better part of a century with Ebenezer Howards
Garden Cities, originally published in 1902, and Le Corbusiers Ville Verte, or Green City
from La Ville Radieuse (Radiant City), published in 1935.

Ebenezer Howards concept for the Garden City, figure 2a., imagines a central 5
acre garden as the hub of a radial city plan. The Garden City was planned for a population of 32,000 sharing 1000 acres of town space and supported by 5000 acres of agri-
f i g u r e 2a. Howards Garden Ci ty Diagrammatic Plan No. 3
cultural land. The public buildings formed the first

ring around the garden center and included the town
hall, museums, hospital, library theater and concert
hall. Six large boulevards radiate outward and connect with the other concentric avenues and with
the Grand Avenue, a 420 wide park space located
halfway between the center and outermost transit
ring. This is where the schools and churches were
to be placed. Immediately adjacent to the public
buildings is a large central park, ringed by an indoor
PRECEDENTS
exhibition hall used for market space, foul-weather
recreation events, and winter gardening. The subsequent rings between the crystal palace and first
avenue were designated for residential use. Finally, the outermost rings were used for industry, the
circle line railway, allotments (community gardens),
dairy farms, the main line railway system and large
farms, respectively. The placement of industry near
the main roads and railways was to minimize transit of goods from the factories and would serve to
eliminate that type of traffic from the city center and
residential areas (Howard, 50-55).

Howards plan for the Garden City realized
the aesthetic, social, and financial value of incorporating abundant and varied landscapes into a high
density urban space. Although his message does
09
Ville Radieuse. The Green City was planned to house 1000 people per hectare (2.47
acres) based on LeCorbusiers calculation that each person required 14m2 (150ft2) of living space (LeCorbusier, 143). For the sake of comparison, Howards plan recommended
a minimum lot size of 20 x 100 (2,000 ft2, 185m2) for a family of 4, and Canadas average
urban density is 15.5 people per hectare. (Howard, 54, www.statcan.ca).
f i g u r e 2 b. Vi l l e Verte Plan Detail

not have an overt ecological imperative, it seems
that Howards plan was drafted as a direct response
to increasing industrialization witnessed throughout
the United Kingdom and Europe. Even if the environmental benefits were not as clear as they are
today, Howards Garden City movement clearly saw
the value in preserving green space within our growing cities as paramount.

Another early 20th century plan for a high
density green city came from LeCorbusiers book
f i g u r e 2 c . R a ised Roadways
10

LeCorbusiers Green City plan was built on his 5 principles and included raising of
all structures and roadways off the ground on pilotis (figure 2c.). This move, coupled with
the placement of tall thin ribbons of residential housing, left the ground plane for pedestrian circulation and recreation (figure 2b.). The rooftops were designated for beaches,
presumably for passive activity and sunbathing. Active recreation through sports activities and swimming were encouraged by the inclusion of various types of sports fields and
pools. Vehicles, as in Howards Garden City, are separated from pedestrian traffic and
given the priority of placement at grade. In LeCorbusiers plan, cars are driven on a 5m
elevated road to one of a series of car parks from where the passengers walk to their
figure 2d. Ville Verte Sections
nearby housing unit elevator. Each of these early plans, though different in scale and
treatment, implied a hierarchy of forms that privileged the landscape to inform the placement and nature of the built form. In a sustainable architecture, the natural and cultivated
landscape must have a similar predominance. The sites capacity to support its occupants
is directly related to the performative function of the landscape systems and is what ought
to dictate density. The living systems of the site provide natural ventilation, cooling, and
waste processing functions as well as providing habitat and resources for other connected
systems.

The three contemporary proposals included here are: MVRDVs Pig City, Front
Studios Farmadelphia, and Columbia Universitys Vertical Farm. Each handles the integration of agriculture and built form in a slightly different way. In Pig City (figure 2e),
MVRDV summarizes the motivation for their study: MVRDV seem to be pointing to an
inherent contradiction of our lifestyle, industry practices, and available resources, rather
than making a true pitch to build Pig City. Perhaps the representation of vast towers of
f i g u r e 2f. Vertical Farm
figure 2e. Pig City

pigs across the landscape is intended as a comment
on our consumption habits and to insinuate the hoggish nature of human settlement. (figure 2e.).

Columbia Universitys proposal for a 48
storey Vertical Farm (figure 2f.) is based on the assumptions that cities are becoming more dense and
increased urbanization is utilizing more land previously used for farming. This scheme was designed
to provide food for 50,000, using a state of the art hydroponics system, be net zero regarding emissions,
recycle 100% of the water used, and produce energy by burning methane collected from composted
organic waste from the site and from neighborhood
restaurants (Doron, 57-8). The positive aspects of
this scheme are the closed systems loops of water,
energy, and emissions, however, this project seems
to suffer from the Modernist naivet regarding the
ability of high-technology to prevail where it has only
11
failed in the past. Although the Vertical Farm is designed to sustain itself, it seems that it is doing so in
an overly industrial way, and that an intensive indoor
hydroponics system is chosen over an open-air and
earth system. Of course this is not to suggest that
f i g u r e 2 h . F a rmadelphia Aerial View
f i g u r e 2 k . C o w Street
12
technology is always inferior to more natural ways, but to say that maybe we dont need
the level of control we think we are achieving through a complex, high-tech solution. If we
do find the need to raise our farms into the air, perhaps we can find something more than
just another highly articulated skyscraper.

Another proposal, Front Studios Farmadelphia, looks at the large scale problem
of urban vacancy in Philadelphia and offers a suggestion to fill the voids with agricultural
fields, farms and livestock. Philadelphia has 30,000 vacant parcels that are either postdemolition lots or, abandoned or decrepit buildings. Farmadelphia doesnt propose to
build anything, but simply to fill the empty spaces with agricultural program. Front Studio
is aware of the oddity of the juxtaposition but claim that the irony of the farm and the city
ceases to be a paradox as both function as one integral machine, combining the pleasure
of open sky and land with the richness of city living, (Front Studio). The goal of Farmadelphia, apart from the obvious practical benefits of local agriculture like jobs, community
involvement, etc. Front Studio believe that if people have an active role in farming in their
communities, they will be motivated to make other improvements to the built fabric. Also,
as agricultural profits increase, property values will increase bringing renewed interest into
these forsaken areas.

According to Gil Doron writing for AD, there are over 800,000 people engaged
in some form of urban agriculture, reason enough he believes, for it to become the next
urban revolution to change the face of our cities, (Doron, 59). None of these projects
has been built, perhaps because they challenge our notions of urbanity and of agricul-
figure 2i. Hay Bales
figure 2j. Grain Fields
figure 2l. Sunflowers
SU
ST
A
ture. Although they offer a different approach to this integration, each one contributes a
provocative vision of what the high density farm-cities of the future might look like. Each
also provides a caution that any strategy we employ ought to zoom out and be aware of
the projects larger context and place within the system.

Many tools have emerged around the world to assess the performance of buildings in the area of sustainability. In North America, the LEED rating system has become
the industry standard. LEED has had a remarkable impact in reducing the amount of
harm that buildings have on the environment. However, it has some shortcomings in its
ability to promote truly sustainable practices. Even LEED Platinum rated buildings can
contribute to the existing problems of energy, water, and resource abuse. The majority
of buildings erected in North America are still connected to a municipal water, sewer, or
non-renewable electrical grid, use potable water to flush their toilets, and are heavily dependent on mechanical systems for lighting, heating, and ventilation. The fact that these
practices can continue in a building that achieves LEEDs highest rating is problematic.

Where LEED is effective in reducing harm, the Living Building Challenge (LBC)
THE BIOSPHERE TO SUPPOR
ACITY OF
T LIFE
E CAP
H
T
SES
TING DAMAGE
S
I
A
X
E
E
S
IR
R
REPA
INC
AND
ND
E
A
BLE
L
AB
LE
TAINA
SUS
AIN
AB
T
Reductio
N
I
S
n of h
SU
arm
Reduction
of ha
rm
Reduction of ha
rm
LEED
CERTIFIED
SILVER
GOLD
PLATINUM
LIVING BUILDING
RESTORATIVE
REGENERATIVE
f i g u r e 3a. Concentric Rings of Sustainability ( a d a p t e d f r o m L B C , v. 1 . 3 )
aspires to have a positive impact on the environment and even to repair some of the damage already done. The Living Building Challenge sets
out a list of 16 prerequisites that must be met for a
project to qualify as a Living Building. An additional
two prerequisites are added to the Living Site and
Infrastructure Challenge (LSIC). LEED uses a system of credits, many of which are optional, that the
builder can choose in order to meet a particular level
of LEED rating, namely; LEED rated, Silver, Gold,
ASSESSMENT TOOLS
or Platinum. In that system economic factors could
take precedence over performance factors while still
allowing the builder to achieve their desired level of
LEED rating. In other words, they can choose to
meet particular criteria and to ignore others. (and
still achieve the desired level) In the Living Building Challenge, all pre-requisites must be met. This
requires a higher level of commitment and suggests
a more integrated design approach. The LBC does
not dictate how criteria be met, allowing for innovation by designers.

A combination of The Living Building Challenge v. 1.2 and the Living Site and Infrastructure
Challenge v. 1.0 prerequisites is as follows (LBC
only, LSIC only):
1. Responsible site selection - Projects may not
13
be built within 50-feet of wetlands, on or adjacent to

sensitive ecological habitats such as primary dunes,
old-growth forest, or virgin prairie.
2. Limits to growth - Projects may only be built
on previously developed sites, either greyfield or
brownfield.
3. Habitat Exchange - For each acre of development, an equal amount of land must be set aside as
part of a habitat exchange.
4. Net-Zero Energy - 100 percent of the buildings
energy needs supplied by on-site renewable energy
on a net annual basis.
5. Materials Red List - The project cannot contain
any materials from the provided list, such as; PVC,
Lead, Polyurethane, CFCs, and others. (See LBC v.
1.2 for list.)
6. Construction Carbon Footprint - The project
must account for the embodied carbon footprint of
its construction through a one-time carbon offset
tied to the buildings square footage and general
construction type.
7. Responsible Industry - All wood must be FSC
certified or from salvaged sources.
8. Appropriate Materials / Service Radius - Materials and services can be supplied to the site based
on type (size, weight, etc.) to the maximum distance
specified.
9. Leadership in Construction Waste - Construc-
14
tion Waste must be diverted from landfill to the following levels, i.e.: Metals - 95%.
10. Net-Zero Water - 100 percent of occupants water use must come from captured precipitation or reused water that is appropriately purified without the use of chemicals
11. Sustainable Water Discharge - 100 percent of storm water and building water discharge must be handled on-site.
12. A Civilized Work Environment - Every occupiable space must have operable windows that provide access to fresh air and daylight.
13. Healthy Air / Source Control - All buildings must meet a list of certain criteria for
example;
All kitchens and bathrooms must be separately ventilated. (See document for complete list.)
14. Healthy Air - Ventilation - The building must be designed to deliver air change rates
in compliance with California Title 24 requirements.
15. Beauty and Spirit - The project must contain design features intended solely for human delight and the celebration of culture, spirit and place appropriate to the function of
the building.
16. Inspiration and Education - Educational materials about the performance and operation of the project must be made available to the public in order to inspire and educate.
Non-sensitive areas of the building must be held open to the public at least one day per
year, to facilitate direct contact with a truly sustainable building.
17. Biophilia - People are nurtured through a connection to life and life-like natural processes. Too much of the modern worlds infrastructure is lifeless and inert. The project
must contain significant elements of life through all major spaces.
18. Human Scale and Humane Places - The scale of a landscape or infrastructure project of any type determines whether or not the project helps to create or undermines a
sense of place and community. Living Site and Infrastructure projects must maintain the
current sense of human scale, or repair imbalance to the current sense of human scale
and community that existed prior to the intervention.

There are areas where the Living Building Challenge could be improved, for ex-
ample; there is no minimum window or wall thermal performance requirements, no prerequisite that addresses building durability (permanence), reusability or decommissioning.
Although no tool will be complete, the LBC is valuable for its holistic approach and its
recognition of the importance of beauty, education, culture and ecology in its pursuit of
sustainability. The Living Building Challenge also recognizes that there is more that could
be done (figure 3a.). On their sustainability diagram, the outermost ring represents the
highest goal for building. At the center LEED Rated represents the minimum acceptable
standard, followed by LEED Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Next in line is the Living Building
Challenge, which represents sustainable building, followed by restorative buildings which
repair existing damage to local ecosystems. Another ring was added for the purpose of
this discussion: for regenerative design. Regenerative design is sustainable, can be restorative, but actually adds to or improves existing natural systems.
A schematic design of a project with regenerative
aspirations is discussed below.
Another
issue that the LBC could address in future would
be one of financial sustainability and, particularly in
Vancouver, affordability. The Eco-Density Charter
is a document written by the city of Vancouver that
pledges a commitment to promoting green design
SITE SELECTION
200
1
1
0
0
1
1
3
2
greater vancouver
Truck Routes
200
400
600 m
5 km
3 mi
YVR Airport
f i g u r e 3b.- Site Context
Site Boundary
Site Boundary
local parks
Local Parks
through improved] environmental performance and

increased density, housing choice and affordability;
and, livable communities that emphasize walking,
biking and mass transit. The Eco-Density Charter wants to offer incentives to sustainable design
through floor space exclusions that directly relate
to green design technologies. Perhaps an FSR bonus could be awarded for increased ceiling heights
which could be incorporated into a daylight and natural ventilation strategy, or used for loft space in a
live/work unit.

A second local initiative that includes affordability as part of a cohesive approach to sustainability is Smart Growth BCs Affordable Housing Policy.
This policy details several elements important to
sustainable growth including: Land Use and Afford-
15
DUN
SMU
MAIN
IR
PRIOR
Site Boundary
STREET
16
proposed location for this project is a brownfield site immediately adjacent to Vancouver
Central Station along Station Street and in the vicinity of Terminal Avenue (figure 3b.).

This site was chosen for several reasons in addition to meeting the brownfield
criterion. As industry in Vancouver has shifted over the last decades, many sites have
become vacant. Vacant areas in a city, if left too long, can become problematic and have
a detrimental effect on the neighborhoods around them. People can feel insecure in
vacant areas and might be less inclined to walk by them in early or late hours of the day.
If there are businesses, their trade could suffer in empty looking areas giving a false impression that they are closed as well. In urban areas people expect to see other people
and fewer empty lots. Although it would be hard to imagine Vancouver with the problem
of vacancy that Philadelphia has, their problem did not happen over night. It was likely a
QUEBEC
able Housing, Housing Choice, Density, Transportation, Vibrant Economies, Mixed Neighborhoods, Design, Green Standards, and Planning for Affordable
Housing. The document makes it clear that Affordable housing encompasses more than non-market
housing; it means that families and individuals, of all
income levels and lifestyles, can find suitable places
to live and enjoy a stable, secure place to call home,
(Smart Growth BC, 1).

All three of these documents acknowledge a
systemic relationship among the various component
parts of their framework and stress the importance
of a multi-faceted approach to designing for sustainability, affordability, and future growth.

The LBC requires that either a brownfield or
greyfield site be chosen rather than building on a site
that has never been built on before. This provides
a limit to growth and encourages urban revitalization in areas that might have been left fallow for too
long. As mentioned above, Philadelphia has nearly
30,000 vacant sites. Although those sites might not
be attractive to developers, a municipal government
or planning body could target a particular area for
redevelopment and continue the pattern throughout
the city.

In Vancouvers case, there are many opportunities for development on vacant post-industrial
sites such as the one we will discuss here. The
TERM
INAL
AVE
Bus Routes
Sky Train
Bicycle Path - Off Street
Aquabus
Bicycle Path - On Street
Transit Stop
figure 3c.- Transit Options
Pacific Central Train Station

VIA Rail, Amtrak, Greyhound Lines
slow and gradual process.

There are several advantages of location to future residents and occupants of this
site: its proximity to the metropolitan core, but with lower density provides opportunities
for work, commerce, and residence within a range of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit distances. There are several transit stops surrounding the site providing a variety of transit
types: local diesel and trolley buses, Skytrain, aquabus, regional bus service and long
distance passenger trains. False creek, with its bicycle and pedestrian paths, is a short
walk. It is also close to main roads for driving trips out of Vancouver (in ones zero emissions, renewable energy vehicle, of course). Most urban sites have reasonable access
to a multitude of program types; schools, shops, parks, etc. but this location has those
within very short distances. In most cases, a walk, bike ride, or a few transit stops away.
Program design and integration with the immediate neighborhood and larger community
is an important part of a sustainable approach to design. Rather than following the lead
of the status quo, which may be a remnant of outmoded zoning policy; or choosing only
the most profitable building types, a successful community design requires a reflexive
response to the existing, the anticipated, and the unexpected.

As mentioned in section 1, world populations are trending toward urban environments and will continue to do so into the foreseeable future. This shift has already begun
to change the nature of our urban areas. Rafi Segal and Els Verbakel, in AD vol.78, no.01,
outline the issue theyve termed dispersal, in the following way; as urban areas become
more populous, city centers become depopulated and people spread out to surrounding
areas (Segal & Verbakel, 106). Though some cities do not see negative growth of their
central cores it is important to realize that a recognizable trend to do so is emerging in
many places. One could speculate that as the most dense areas of our cities become even
more dense, their fabric becomes homogenized by the built form that dominates them and
limits the variety of experiences one can have in the city center. Although there might be
myriad businesses, residential towers, and cultural opportunities in the metropolitan core,
there seems to be little else. Green spaces are usually compartmentalized and, even if
large, dis-integrated from the rest of the urban form.

Why are people leaving the city center yet remaining
close by? Obviously the city has much to offer, but
it does not have everything that many of us hope to
find there.

There is likely a host of reasons that more
people live close to, but not in the city center, such
as; more green space, less density, lower buildings, reduced expenses, larger homes, etc. But as
people spread out, commutes increase by increas-
ARCHITECTURAL ISSUES
ing numbers of people, most of whom are traveling
by automobile. The graph below shows the number
of daily transit users by transit mode for Vancouver
(figure 3d.). Further Natural Resources Canada data
shows that 35% of these commutes is less than 5km
(3.1mi) and another 26% less than 10km (6.2mi). If
the majority of people work within 10km of their jobs
or school, it is safe to assume that more would if
they could, but factors such as available space or
affordable housing might deter them. Therefore, in
any new urban development it would be important
to integrate a variety of work spaces (i.e. offices,
shops, services, industry, etc.) with varied residential and institutional programming as a strategy to
reduce the need for individual transit, especially for
short distances. An important initial step for this
17
18
70
0,0
00
60
0,0
00
50
0,0
00
40
0,0
00
30
0,0
00
20
0,0
00
10
0,0
00
project will be to determine the types, ratios, and

location of area program. The program will include
natural and cultivated landscapes as well as built
form (figure 3e.). The process will likely prove to
be an elastic one where each component will push
and pull against every other until a balance is struck.
Factors governing the balance include the following:
Ecological - such as habitat connections to adjacent
greenspace, and the ratio of biomass to built form;
Density - relating to the carrying capacity of the site,
(i.e. energy generation, water collection, biofiltration,
and waste remediation capability), and others.
Commuter Numbers
by Transit Mode
72%
654,055
Car, Truck, Van,

as driver
12%
104,020
Public Transit
7%
63,645
Car, Truck, Van,

as passenger
6%
58,705
Walking
2%
16,580
Bicycle
1%
5,800
Other Method
<1%
1,475
Motorcycle
<1%
1,445
Taxi Cab
figure 3d.- Daily Transit Users by Tr a n s i t M o d e
4
3
2
1
f i g u r e 3e.- Hierarchy of Form
Secondary Cultivated Landscape
supported green roofs and faades, building integrated

agriculture and greenhouses
Built Form
buildings and paved connections between buildings
Primary Cultivated Landscape
supported landscape at grade or connected to grade,

agricultural and recreational fields, botanical gardens,
constructed wetlands, storm water ponds, and water
gardens
Naturalistic Landscape
self-sustaining, dense, forest-like landscape, contiguous

across the site and aligns or connects to landscapes
off-site, natural ponds or other surface water
HIERARCHY OF FORM

A hierarchy of form is necessary to govern
the way our natural systems integrate with built form
to describe a life-supportive urban fabric. The diagram to the left is one suggestion of how this will
be approached in the design phase of this project
(figure 3e).

The first priority is the natural landscape
fabric. Although this would have to be initially manufactured on site, the goal would be a naturalistic,
self-maintaining landscape with forest-like density
in parts and contiguous across the site. This landscape would be aligned with adjacent landscapes
off site creating a local habitat corridor and eventually connecting to a continuous habitat network that
would thread itself throughout the fabric of the city.
The density will support a variety of botanical and
19
zoological species, provide a natural detoxification

zone to absorb CO2 and storm water runoff from the
built form and possibly from adjacent development
off-site.

The next level is the Primary Cultivated
Landscape which includes spaces for recreation,
botanical or food gardens, and agricultural program
at grade or connected to the ground level, such as
a terraced field that spans multiple vertical levels.
This type of landscape requires maintenance and
includes constructed wetlands for bioremediation,
storm water collection ponds and water gardens.

The Built Form is next, and includes all
buildings, paved connections between buildings and
exterior furniture and lighting. The site placement
and orientation of buildings will be determined by
use and interrelationship of use, connection to adjacent neighborhood spaces (built, cultivated, and
natural), and microclimatic considerations.

The last priority is the Secondary Cultivated
Landscape which includes green roofs and faades,
building integrated agriculture and greenhouses.
These are mostly dependent on the placement of
the other three form types as they occupy surfaces
that are typically left over. That is not to say that its
design and placement are not carefully considered
since their performance is related to their orientation
and relationship to other cultivated surfaces. The
20
final image is a composite of all layers.

If we recognize that human systems are dependent on other living systems, then
we must design both natural and cultivated landscapes into our urban spaces to regenerate this capacity. We must nurture the system, if it is to nurture us.
SCHEMATIC EXPLORATIONS:

The following drawings explore some of the ways that agricultural program might
be integrated into built form. The composite image from the previous diagram shows what
that integration might be like at the site scale. Connections to green space, community
amenities, and other program inform the orientation, building placement and access into
the site.

The central idea for this building is the vertical separation of terraced fields to
increase the available surface area for growing space. The building was designed to face
the street on the North and West faades. It is imagined as a small mixed-use residential
community in one building. Programmatically it would have shops along the street level
faades with office and other work spaces on the second and third levels. There could
be a few small cafs or sandwich shops peppered through the second residential level
adjacent to the covered plaza areas to support informal social gatherings of the residents.
There would be some public open space mixed with individual and collective garden plots
on all levels.

The majority of surfaces (see area breakdown, fig. 3h.) would be intensive depth
planting for agricultural or botanical production, bioswales, or natural landscape. In addition to the flat and terraced fields, there are a number of large greenhouses for alternate
climatic zone planting (i.e. tropical) and for winter agricultural production. The greenhouses are intended for collective production. Most units will also have a small integrated
greenhouse space (fig. 3k.)Other units will have access to greenhouse space shared
between a 4 or 5 units, (i.e. at the end of a row).

In traditional urban developments there is a large percentage of impermeable
surfaces causing problems with; excessive storm water run off; the heat-island effect; and
Simple Pla
105m
8400m2
80ms t Vi e w
f i g u r e 3 g . S o u t h We
Horizontal Fields
5022 m2 - agricultural and recreational use,

intensive (deep) planting depth
Terraced Fields
3380 m2 - agricultural use,

intensive planting depth
Covered Areas
1247m2 - recreational use, partial sun

Greenhouses
Cumulative
1218m2 - recreational use,

extensive planting depth
10, 867m
Balcony Space
833m2 - potted plants, hedgerow railings
f i g u r e 3f.- North East View
21
80m
Sun Angles
summer and winter sun angles
W
S
f i g u r e 3 i . - S u mmer & Winter Sun Angles
22
Horizontal Fields
5022 m2 - agricultural and recreational use,

Simple Plan Area

8400m2
Terraced Fields
105m
3380 m2 - agricultural use,

Covered Areas

Greenhouses

Balcony Space
80m
Simple Plan Area

8400m2
Cumulative Surface Area
10, 867m2 - excluding faades
105m
reduction of the overall biomass. In this schematic

design, the simple plan area of the footprint measures 8400m2 (90,000 ft2). When the volumes are
separated vertically and horizontally as described
the total surface area is increased by 29%. The
living building challenge requires a 1 to 1 habitat
exchange. Some of that could be provided by the
building itself with the inclusion of a percentage of
natural landscape.

The main building volumes are made up of
an 8m (26) tall terraced field, with a 4 storey residential section above. This volume is angled toward
the south providing summer shade for the Southfacing units but full sun on the terraced fields (figure
3i.). The North- facing faades are angled the opposite way to allow sun to reach the flat fields behind
them. In the winter, the sun will shine into the units
when solar gain might reduce the need for additional
space heating.
833m2 - potted plants, hedgerow railings
figure 3j.- Plan Area Calculations

The agricultural
Horizontalprogram
Fields occupies the majority of surface area, but there will also
2
5022 and
m - agricultural
and recreational
use,
be recreational, social
occasional
spaces on
each level. These exterior landscape
spaces will be connected to one another and to the ground where appropriate.
Terraced Fields

The massing
building,use,
apart from daylighting and sun-lighting, encourages
2
3380ofmthe
- agricultural
80m planting depth
intensive
natural ventilation through a series of double-height outdoor spaces. These spaces will
Covered
Areas as shared community space. Additionally, the placement
be designed and
programmed
Fields
of forms canHorizontal
achieve
high
occupant
intensive
planting depthdensities, but with a sense of openness, and immedi5022 m2 - agricultural and recreational use,
ate physical andintensive
visual(deep)
connections
to the landscape. The residents of this building, in
planting depth
Greenhouses
Cumulative Surface Area
2
2
1218m
- recreational
use,
10, 867m
- excluding
addition to having
an
individual
plot
in
one
of
the
community
gardens,
willfaades
have access to
Terracedextensive
Fieldsplanting depth
2
m - agricultural
use, in close proximity to their unit, or a building-integratspace in a small3380
shared
greenhouse
Balcony
Spacedepth
intensive planting
833min2 - their
pottedunit
plants,
hedgerow
railings
ed greenhouse space
(figure
3k.).
This wall would likely be integrated into a
Covered Areas
kitchen / dining 1247m
space,
but coulduse,
be partial
connected
to the main living space of a smaller unit
2
- recreational
sun
intensive
planting
depth
as well.

ThisGreenhouses
diagrammatic sectional perspective shows
what Surface
this might
look like as built
Cumulative
Area
10, 867m2 - excluding faades
into a South-facing
wall of a typical unit. The ceiling height is designed at 12 (3.6m) for
daylight andBalcony
ventilation.
SpaceThe topmost row of windows is a Kalwall-type translucent insu833m2 - potted plants, hedgerow railings
Building Integrated Greenhouse

kalwall type insulated
translucent panel
external solar shading
with solar thermal collector
operable super-insulated
windows
light shelf
exhaust ventilation and integrated

supplemental grow light
double glazed sliding window panes
for interior or exterior greenhouse access
shallow growing shelf with
integrated drainage and grow light
hedgerow railing
deep growing shelf with
integrated drainage
exterior patio balcony
slot drains
central drain
23
lated panel. This will not be shaded on the exterior

to allow bright diffuse light, but not heat, into the unit.
The next row of fenestration is composed of high
thermal performance super windows. These would
be clear glass and operable to allow more daylight
and provide natural ventilation options. They are
shaded on the exterior by a louver-style arrangement of evacuated solar thermal collection tubes.
They provide summer sun shading and collect heat
for hot water and space-heating applications. They
can be adjusted to maximize solar heat collection
from lower winter sun angles. Directly below this
row of windows is an interior shelf that will act as a
light shelf to bounce light deeper into the unit and
provide a place for additional potted plants or seed
starters. The underside of the shelf houses artificial
grow lights and the mechanical ventilation for the
greenhouse section below.

The thermal performance of a window wall
is typically quite low, as it is in a typical household
greenhouse. In order for the greenhouse to function
well as a window or wall replacement, it is designed
here as a double faade with double-glazed panels
on the interior and exterior sides. Inside the growing area, there is an adjustable shelf with integrated
drainage. It is a shallow growing depth suitable for
herbs, flowers or other shallow-depth planting. Under the shelf are the grow lights for the deeper grow-
24
ing shelf. This shelf is deeper and can accommodate larger plants with longer roots. The
shelf will drain into a central collection drain in the wall. The grow areas are accessible
from the interior or exterior through sliding window panels to allow all-weather access.
There are slot drains along the floor inside and out for maintenance concerns. The patio directs storm water to the outside drain and is collected in the central drainpipe and
reused elsewhere for irrigation. Instead of a traditional railing, a hedgerow is planted to
provide further storm water infiltration, a continuous habitat network connected to other
units and to the adjacent landscape spaces. The hedge will also provide a cooler patio
during warmer summer months and a pleasant aesthetic experience.
CONCLUSION:

The biosphere is a single system, made up of a vast number of smaller interdependent systems that support all of the life on our planet. Our systematic misuse of
those systems over the last 150 years has led us to a situation that requires immediate
and significant action to remediate. If we are to continue to grow as a species we must
acknowledge that every action we make or fail to make, has an impact on these systems.
As architects, landscape architects, and planners we have an immense responsibility to
ensure that our contribution has a positive impact, and is one that will sustain our growth
into the future. We have the necessary knowledge and technology to achieve this and
have never been in a better position to make it happen. If we fail, it would not be for lack
of ability, but lack of desire.

Integrating a variety of landscape and agricultural forms into the fabric of our cities can have a positive and profound impact on many aspects of our lives. By reconnecting to natural systems we will regain an important understanding of those systems and our
place within them. We will make social and cultural connections to our neighbors and the
place we live. We will be in control of our own food system and make a positive contribution to the environment. We will provide places for residence, work and recreation. By
living an active, rather than passive lifestyle, and taking a holistic approach to architectural
development, we can achieve the essential shift toward sustainability and regeneration.
ag r i u r b a n c u l t u r e
THESIS STATEMENT
A city is distinguished by the cultures of the people who comprise it. Though
food is a basic physiological need, it also plays a significant role in describing our cultural
identity. Incorporating a food system into the urban fabric will provide opportunities for
the expression of community and the celebration of culture. Architecture that integrates
a variety of agricultural systems can provide a rich and diverse experience for users at
all scales and levels of involvement. My project investigates moments of intersection
between food, community and culture in the city.
26

AGRICULTURE AND THE CITY
Food, Community & Culture PROPOSAL
Urban Context
Space to Grow

GROWING COMMUNITIES
Individual Scale Agriculture
Floor Scale Agriculture
Building Scale Agriculture

COMMUNITY GROWING
Individual Garden Plot
Small-group Garden Plots

COMPANION PLANTING
Program Map

AGRI-URBAN NETWORK
28
29
34
41
43
43
CONTENTS
45
47
48
49
52
27
FOOD, COMMUNITY & CULTURE
The second phase of this project attempts to make a more targeted argu-
ment for the integration of a food production system into the existing and future fabric of
the city. The rationale remains the same as before: create a sustainable urban typology.
The major ecological motivation for this move is the double-edged fact that cheap oil
(read: transit, production and processing) is a thing of the past, and that the biospheres
capacity to absorb GHGe from oil is diminishing. Although ecological sustainability is a
necessary argument for this integration, it is not a sufficient argument. As I pointed out
earlier, humans have several levels of needs beyond the physiological. The key to a
successful integration of agricultural and architectural systems is the degree to which this
integration is a cultural integration. A city is defined by the people who inhabit it. We have
proved throughout history and in the variety of contemporary cities, that we can adapt to
our environments, wether built or natural. There is not a single urban formula that can
work for all people in all places because the conditions which exist in a place are unique to
that place. In terms of topography, climate and, especially, culture. Urban areas are often
more culturally diverse than other areas in which we live and can provide many oppor-
i m a g e a , b , c . - Urban Food-based Events
28
tunities for social and cultural exchange through food-based events such as occasional
festivals, regular markets, and impromptu gatherings.
Economically, a local food production system can have a positive impact on com-
way through Vancouver. Since that part of the plan
merce, employment, the local tax base, and personal income. In light of the current eco-
was never completed, the viaducts remain an under-
nomic recession we need to ask if a globalized economy is sustainable or even desirable.
used piece of infrastructure in the city. I decided to
It might be more profitable, but it is neither efficient nor secure.
incorporate this infrastructure into my project and to
As this argument develops, one can see that there are many interconnected rea-
propose that it be repurposed to maximize its struc-
sons why an integrated food system would enrich the urban experience and how this
tural potential and to serve an urban rather than re-
interaction might work spatially, and therefore socially. In this project, I try to make archi-
gional objective.
tectural connections across different scales of public spaces. Everywhere food production
occurs is expressed as an opportunity for social interaction between individuals, small
sibilities in the immediate area. Figure 4b outlines
Figures 4b and 4c look at the transit pos-
groups or entire communities. An urban systems success is tied to its transit system
URBAN CONTEXT
and opportunities for an easy commute to all of those destinations that make urban living
desirable: work, school, recreation and shops.
THE SITE
local transit including city buses, the Aquabus and
The site for this project is at the intersection of Main Street and the Dunsmuir
skytrain; and, regional train and bus transport, eas-
Street and Georgia Street viaducts in Vancouver, BC. The local area around the site is
ily accessible on foot from the site. Figure 4c out-
a previously developed industrial area, but currently has many sites that are abandoned,
vacant, or underdeveloped. These brown and greyfield sites represent the future of Van-
GASTOWN
couvers urban development and could easily become the proving ground for urban agriculture typologies of the next decades. We have arrived at an important junction where
CHINATOWN
STRATHCONA
new development needs to break away from the failures of previous generations and
YALETOWN
create a new sustainable urban model.

DOWNTOWN
EASTSIDE
METRO
CORE
As you can see in figure 4b, the site sits in close proximity to the urban core, and
CONCORD PACIFIC
LANDS
INDUSTRIAL
SOUTH EAST FALSE CREEK
to established lower-density residential neighborhoods. It intersects Main Street which

connects the Downtown East Side with Kitsilano and neighborhoods to the South. The
viaducts of Georgia and Dunsmuir Streets provide a strong connection between the metro
core, Strathcona and neighborhoods East. The viaducts were originally planned as part
of high-density traffic system that was to run through the city connecting a major high-
KITSILANO
local transit
long distance transit
site
city bus routes
regional bus
georgia & dunsmuir

street viaducts
skytrain
regional train
site boundary
aqua bus
false creek ferry
pacific central station
figure 4a.- Site Context
29
lines walking and biking radii from the site and maps
we already have a large number of year-round cyclist and pedestrian commuters. As
the existing greenway network as it connects to the
mentioned earlier, 35% of commuters travel less than 5k and the vast majority of those
proposed garden corridor and garden streets of my
are driving alone in their car to and from work. If we had a major connector road, such
project. As it is today, traffic flows one way West
as Dunsmuir Street, designated as a car-free zone, that was actively attended by local
on Dunsmuir and one way East on Georgia Street.
urban gardeners, and offered a rich landscape across the city, I believe we would see a
Since the viaducts receive a lower than planned
reduction of vehicle traffic in favor of bicycles and pedestrians. This change would have
density of traffic, I believe that Georgia Street could
an immediate positive impact on commuter traffic and the pedestrian / cyclist commuter
accommodate two-way traffic thus leaving Dunsmuir

Street open for a new use. I propose that Dunsmuir
Street become a pedestrian and bicycle only garden
corridor connecting Prior and Granville Streets. This
garden corridor would primarily be a dedicated pedestrian/cycle route but could also behave as a major living artery through the city providing habitat for
0.8k
various plant and animal species and corridor into

which local communities could establish a series of
1.6k
small scale community gardens.

5in
0.4k
5in
m
1m0in
1m5in
The images on the right depict three urban
projects that designate a significant piece of infra-
1m0in
.0km
25in
m
structure for pedestrian/cyclist only use. The automobile has dominated urban streets for the better
part of a century but does not represent a sustainable model for future urban growth. Though it is naive to think that cars will disappear from city streets,
we need to invest in truly sustainable alternatives
green space network
georgia & dunsmuir street viaducts

existing greenways
parks & open green space

community gardens
to the automobile for local city transit. Since Vancouvers climate is generally mild, though very wet,
30
figure 4b.- Greenways Network
proposed garden corridor
walking & biking radii

proposed garden streets

existing condition
proposed two-way
traffic change
site boundary
experience. If the city actively pursued creating other such routes connected to this one,
Vancouver would address an existing desire and create a viable automobile alternative to
attract future users. These garden corridors need not be static nor permanent. Ottawas
Rideau Canal, for example, caters to different populations of users from summer to winter.
In Vancouver, we could designate some corridors as car-free during specific times of year,
daytime or evening hours.

The garden corridors (in red) are meant to function both as a route and as a
E.
image d.- Rideau Canal, Ottawa
GEORGIA ST R E E T
GORE
Andy
Livingstone
Park
AVENU
E
STREET
PRIOR
ST R E E T
DUNLEVY
UNION
EET VIADUCT
DUNSMUIR STR
AVENUE
GEORGI
A STRE
ET VIADU
CT
P
A
C
IC
B
L
MAI N
QUEBEC
IF
V
image e.- Highline Proposal, NYC

STATION
STREET
STREET
STREET
SKYTRAIN
25m
MILROSS
Dunsmuir Street Garden Corridor
Existing Greenways Network
Georgia Street (Two-way Traffic)
green space network
f i g u r e 4c.- Garden Streets
25m
75m
AVENUE
Proposed Garden Streets
georgia & dunsmuir street viaducts

existing greenways
parks & open green space

community gardens
proposed garden corridor
Existing Buildings
Existing Viaducts
Boundary

proposed garden streets

existing condition
proposed two-way
traffic change
Existing Trees
site boundary
i m a g e f . - Gateshead Millennium Bridge, UK
31
Andy
Livingstone
Park
E.
GEORGIA ST R E E T
Andy
Livingstone
Park
A
MAI N
A
MAI N
UNION
STR
PRIOR
ST R
DUNLEVY
AVENUE
ST R E E T
PRIOR
STREET VI
AVENU
GEORGIA
GORE
ET VIADUC
STRE
DUNSMUIR
STREET
UCT
STREET VIAD
STREET
STREET
DUNSMUIR
UNION
ADUCT
P
A
C
QUEBEC
IF
IC
B
L
V
D
.
STREET V
IADUCT
QUEBEC
C
B
L
V
f i g u r e 4 d . - K ey Plan
32
STREET
SKYTRAIN
STATION
STREET
GEORGIA
A
25m
MILROSS
AVENUE
25m
75m
Thornton Park
figure 4e - Detail
STREE
5m
5m
15m
f i g u r e 4f.- Garden Street Section AA at Station Street

destination connecting community gardens across larger distances within the city. The
nity garden population and act as a green connector
garden streets (light blue lines), however, are intended for local pedestrian traffic and
between Thornton Park and neighborhoods to the
cycling within ones own neighborhood and between adjacent neighborhoods. I envision
North through the site of my project (figure 4f).
that these streets could provide a variety of function and experience for local residents
and visitors. Firstly, they provide space for growing. Community gardens could be located
formed by the existing city streets grid and to the
in the center of wider lanes and act as a primary focal point. They could occupy one side
major axes through the project site. If future devel-
or another on narrower lanes or be incorporated into intersecting plazas between lanes.
opment follows these types of neighborhood cues,
These lanes can also provide a finer, pedestrian-focused, grain to the city. In program-
a pedestrian network begins to develop and con-
ming these neighborhood communities, they should incorporate a ratio of commercial,
nect residents to a larger local community than they
work and residential uses appropriate to the locale. The garden streets would also pro-
might find in their building or on their block. When
vide space for occasional events such as farmers markets, harvest or other festivals.
considered in conjunction with occasional events,
Again, these events could be staged centrally in wider lanes, to the sides of narrower ones
opportunities to meet or reacquaint increase. A
and in intersecting open spaces.
sense of community arises from these types of inci-
dental meetings as much as from other more regular
For example, in figure 4d, Station Street has been converted to a garden street
excluding all car traffic. I imagine that this street could accommodate a large commu-
The frequency of the garden streets is in-
interactions.
33
SPACE TO GROW
Urban agriculture takes many forms. It can be high-tech, as in Columbia
Universitys Vertical Farm (Doron, 57); low-tech, like a typical community garden; or some
combination of the two. The deciding factors are how much food to grow and whether to
raise livestock in addition to growing fruits and vegetables. Many of the opponents and
critics of urban agriculture claim that cheap land outside of the cities is plentiful and that
traditional factory farm practices are the most efficient way to provide the quantities of
food that an often dense urban population requires. In my opinion, neither one of these
arguments is persuasive. Firstly, world population is increasing along with a trend toward
urban centers. As this occurs, cities will expand into the plentiful land which surrounds it.
Second, as illustrated in figure 4i, factory farming is actually many times less efficient from
a space to food ratio when compared with an organic biointensive or hydroponic method.
i m a g e g - C o mmunity Garden
At the beginning of my design process I looked at some of the data regarding a
typical North American diet, and the ecological footprint (land, energy, and water usage)
attached to food production. What I found was that the typical diet was made up mostly
of plant-based foods such as fruits, vegetables, breads, oils, and beverages. As figure 4f
illustrates, 66% of our diet is from plants and only 34% from animals, including meat and
34
dairy products. Even though animal based foods represent only about 1/3 of our diet, they
account for over 3/4 of the ecological footprint from food production. Some sustainability
advocates contend that reducing meat intake is the single most effective way of reducing
our individual ecological footprint. This data suggested that a focus on plant-based production could provide the environmental and spatial efficiencies necessary for success in
an urban context. Providing space to grow only plant-based food provides the majority of
meat
a typical diet with the minimum of space and resources as compared to meat production.

The primary goal of this project was to integrate a high density mixed-use pro-
veg
gram that incorporates space to grow 100% of the residents yearly plant-based food intake. The spatial analysis of food production methods reveals a myth about high-capacity
factory farming. The common belief is that factory farming, read: large scale, is more
efficient for delivering food to large urban populations. The belief is that land values are
lower outside of urban areas where the majority of farming takes place and that large
farms can provide more food per unit of land than smaller farms or individual garden plots.
Typical Diet
f i g u r e 4 g . - Av e r a g e N o r t h A m e r i c a n
D i e t b y F o o d Ty p e
This belief is false. As one can see in figure 4i, to provide a family of 4 with its yearly intake
of fruits and vegetables, a traditional farm requires 35,000 sf of land. (Holland Barrs, et
al., 37) According to John Jeavons book, How to Grow More Vegetables than You Ever
Thought Possible on Less Land than you Could Imagine, the same family requires only
300 sf for the same yield. His method is a variation on a centuries-old French method
meat
known as the biointensive method. In this type of raised bed farming, plants are grouped
with other plants that give what their neighbors need and need what their neighbors give.
veg
Jeavons calls this companion planting. This concept has become the metaphor for the
programmatic design of this project which is discussed in more detail later. Hydroponic
veg
meat
methods of farming provide further efficiencies. A family of 4 needs only 111 sf to provide
its yearly plant-based food intake (Holland Barrs et al., 37). Why do people continue to
believe that industrial farming methods are more efficient if these data are true? Big farms
figure 4h.- Ecological Footprint of Food

Typical
Diet
Ecological

P r o d u c t i o n Footprint
b y F o o d Ty p e
of money. What is untrue is that they receive more money per unit of food than smaller
35
of Food Production
are good at producing large volumes of food which mean that they receive large amounts
Single Family House: 2 Adults & 2 Children

Parcel Area: 2,500 sf / 232m2
Conventional Factory Farming: 35,000 sf / 3,237 m2

Jeavons Biointensive Method: 300 sf / 28 m2
Hydroponic Method: 111sf / 10.3 m2
f i g u r e 4 i . - S p ace Needed to Produce a Familys Yearly Soft Fruit and Vegetable Inta k e b y P r o d u c t i o n M e t h o d
36
farms. In fact the Food Miles report from the city of Waterloo indicates that the larger
the farm is the less profitable it is (Xuereb, 12). They continue, however, because they
still make more money by volume even though the profit margins are smaller. These so
called economies of scale are the philosophical cause of many of our current problems.
Jevons Biointensive Method (100 sf / 9.4m2):

40,000 sf / 400 residents
Central production and distribution systems in food, products and energy (electricity) provide larger volumes of money to producers but create enormous waste streams along the
way. These loses are transmission losses of one sort or another. In electricity generation
nearly 20% of the energy is lost from the source to the end user. In food and other production, the transmission losses occur in long distance transit from farm to fork and in many
urban areas, such as Vancouver, in the transit of organic waste out of the city to uncovered
compost heaps.

The next step was to see how high-density building forms might accommodate
30m
20
f i g u r e 4 j . - Ye a r l y Ve g e t a b l e I n t a k e
space to grow food for each of its residents. Figures 4j and 4k diagram a typical residential high-rise form with a 20m x 30m footprint and housing 400 people and compares the
spatial requirements of both the Jeavons and hydroponic methods of food production.
Though simplified, this analysis suggested some possible directions for my design. Although it might be possible to adapt this high-rise form to integrate food production, in the
Hydroponic Method (49 sf / 4.6m2):

20,000 sf / 400 residents
faade for example, I felt that adopting a tower typology would be an endorsement of this
type of urban dwelling. I am not a fan of high-rise in its typical form because it ignores
important scales of social and community space. There are three scales in a typical
residential tower: the building as a whole, the individual unit and small scale lobby and
service spaces. There is a lack of interior and exterior communal spaces in many towers.
In this project I was not only concerned with finding space to grow food or to solve a simple
logistical problem. I wanted the food production spaces to provide opportunities for social
interaction, and to do so at a variety of scales throughout. Finding space within the faade
of a building would likely not achieve that aim since these spaces would be attached to
individual units.
20 Storey Tower: 400 Residents

Parcel Area: 6,450 sf / 600 m2
30m
20
f i g u r e 4 k . - Ye a r l y Ve g e t a b l e I n t a k e
20 Storey Tower: 400 Residents
Parcel Area: 6,450 sf / 600 m2
37
INTERIOR
Building Scale:
Floor Scale:
Unit Scale:
Rooftop Greenhouse
Fixed Production Space

Hydroponic: 220m2, (2370 sf)
Soil:
180m2, (1940 sf)
Greenhouse Corridor
Flexible Production Space

Hydroponic: 102m2, (1102 sf)
Soil:
102m2, (1102 sf)
Integrated Greenhouse
Soil or Small-scale Hydroponic:

3.4m2, (37 sf) / unit
Total: 68m2, (735 sf)
EXTERIOR
Community Scale:
Garden Plots
Community Garden Plots

9.28m2, (100 sf) / plot
sample residential module

commercial space
f i g u r e 4 l . - S p ace to Grow
38
Total Growing Space (All Modules):
1865m2, (20,078 sf) 550 residents = 3.4m2, (37 sf) person
The residential component of my project explores a different building typology
that will accommodate food production as social space at different scales of growth and
social interaction. The diagram to the left illustrates the location and type of food production spaces and indicates at what scale each space is operating in a typical module block
10 units wide.

At the building scale, the rooftop greenhouse (figure 4s) contains the largest food
Family of 4:
100% (Hydroponic)
49% (Bointensive in Soil)
production space and has dedicated areas for both hydroponic and soil-based culture.
This is high-capacity production area and provides a space for collective food production.
It would be a space where staple crops might be cultivated by a farmer for the entire building. The farmer, and staff, would be residents of the building and employed by the building
association much like a superintendent. The farmer could oversee all food production
operations in the building and provide agricultural education and training to residents in
Family of 3:
92% (Hydroponic)
the form of demonstrations and training. Residents of the building could volunteer labour
in exchange for training, or as a recreational activity.

Just below the rooftop greenhouse is a series of two-storey apartments or condo-
miniums. The residents of these units have shared access to a greenhouse corridor that
runs along the face of the building on the other side of the corridors which link the units
(figure 4r). These greenhouse corridors have both interior and exterior growing space
and can be used for either hydroponic or soil-based production or a combination of the
2 Person Family:
86% (Hydroponic)
two. These areas, though shared, would have individually assigned space for specific
individual or family use. Outdoors are the social spaces and some raised beds for openair soil-based food production. The social areas are designed in three scales as well;
providing individual, small group and large group spaces.

Next, below the condominium units, are two levels of two-storey townhouse units.
There is one level at ground level, connected to the public corridor that runs through the
site from Main to Gore Streets. Above that is another level of townhouses with an exterior
corridor to connect neighbors to one another and to the central atria between the modules.
Individual:
75% (Hydroponic)
f i g u r e 4 m - P e r c e n t o f Ye a r l y F r u i t & Ve g e -

table Intake Produced on
Site
by Production Method
39
f i g u r e 4 n . - R esidential Ground Level Plan
40
I N D I V I DUAL SCALE

The upper level of townhouses has two fewer units in the center to create a cov-
ered, outdoor social space accessible to all residents (Figure 4p). Each of these units
has a mini-greenhouse integrated into the front faade. This space can be used for hydroponic or soil culture or a combination of the two. Although intended for individual food
production, this greenhouse wall is designed so that it can be accessed from the inside
or the outside. When outside, the resident has an opportunity to interact with gardening
neighbors and with the passersby in the adjacent public corridor. On the inside, the greenhouse is connected to the main living space. The double layer faade provides a privacy
screen as well as climatic mediation between inside, growing space, and outside. There
is a gated hedgerow that provides another level of privacy between the units and the
figure 4p.- Exterior Social Space Detail

public pedestrian corridor. This hedgerow creates a
semi-private corridor where residents can meet one
another while gardening outside.
Direct sunlight
is diffused by an insulated window pane at the top

of the wall and filtered by plant material. Each unit
kalwall-type insulated
translucent panel
collects storm water that runs off of the greenhouse
light shelf, potted plants
structure and excess irrigation water.
interior access sliding windows,

with high-performance glazing
shallow growing shelves, seedlings,
herbs, grasses, salad garden, small
plants,
exterior access sliding windows,

single glazed
public corridor
semi-private residential corrior
community stormwater
collection point, system drainage
deep growing shelf, can be used

for soil culture or hydroponic food
production.
2
3.4m(37sf)
growingspace
f i g u r e 4o.- Building Integrated Greenhouse Section Perspective EE
image h.- individual gardening
41
5m
f i g u r e 4 q . - R esidential Mid-Level Pla n (Apartments/Condominiums)
42
5m
15m
F L O O R SCALE

At this scale, residents are assigned their own soil plot or hydroponic bay in the
greenhouse corridor across the corridor from their unit. This greenhouse corridor offers
both interior and exterior space for growing and socializing. Inside the greenhouse, neighbors can see and converse with one another across floors. Outside there are patios of
different sizes and on each level connected through an open exterior stairway. There are
both covered and open spaces outside to allow residents year-round access. In addition
to these social spaces, residents of the condominium floors have a single large gathering space in the adjoining atria at the end of their corridor (figure 4f). The residents can
access the elevator and stairways from each floor and have an open view down to the
gathering space in the atrium when they pass through. This common gathering space,
image i.- parallel gardening
in addition to the communal gardening spaces, provide an opportunity for community to

develop between neighbors. This space can also be used for occasional events or celebratory gatherings.
B U I L D ING SCALE

The space for urban agriculture, if not on the ground, must be found on under
used rooftop space. In new buildings the food production spaces become the impetus
for the design strategy. In the case of my project, the production spaces had to function
also as social spaces. As Ive shown, these exist at different scales and address all of the
different occupants of the site. The residents interact in small groups or even in simple
pairs. The rooftop greenhouse space is the largest production space and therefore provides the social space for the largest number of residents. The adjoining atria have the
largest floor area to accommodate a variety of uses. The food production areas include
a large self-enclosed hydroponic greenhouse and a separate, continuous deep-soil bed
for larger scale crops such as corn or wheat. These production spaces are separated
by large corridor connecting the atria and providing a single continuous path through the
building. The utility spaces often double as a social space. There are a number of utility
f i g u r e 4 r. - G r e e n h o u s e C o r r i d o r

Section DD Detail
43
5m
f i g u r e 4 s . - R esidential Top Level Plan
44
5m
15m
tables spaced throughout the space including one that can seat 26 people. These spaces
could be reserved for special events and are served by an adjacent kitchen. The kitchen
can be used for special event food preparation or for medium scale food preservation.
The space immediately in front of the large table can accommodate another 30 people for
a demonstration lecture, film, or a performance. In addition to the larger tables, there is
seating for individuals or groups of two or three (see figure 4u).

Within the building, there are food production spaces of three distinct scales: the
rooftop greenhouse provides large-scale production for all of the residents of the building;
the greenhouse corridors along the faade provide space for entire floors of residents;
and, the building integrated greenhouses serve each townhouse unit on an individual
figure 4u.- Seating Perspective a
scale.
INDIVIDUAL GARDEN PLOT

Outside the building are the community garden plots. These mirror the social/
compaction from standing. This plot shape and ori-
utility function and scales of the interior food production spaces. The plots are based on
entation works well for individual plots or even in a
John Jeavons 100 sf plot but have been adapted for urban use by creating a more com-
small group, however in a larger urban community
pact footprint that allows for a variety of social and utility spaces. Jeavons biointensive
garden context, the Jeavons plot requires quite a bit
method plots are 4 x 25 and oriented with the short side to the South. The thin aspect
of space. The individual garden plot that I designed
ratio allows the gardener to work the plot from either side, minimizing the amount of soil
is based on Jeavons 100 sf plot but is designed as
f i g u r e 4t.- Rooftop Greenhouse Section EE
image j.- High-capacity Hydroponics
45
a compact unit that can be oriented in any direction and connected to other units to create
a variety of garden spaces. The basic unit is a raised bed in the shape of a hexagon with
an area carved into one side to provide access to the gardener (see figure 4w). The hex
shape is derived from Jeavons method of seed triangulation and concept of companion
planting pictured in the inset below. The hexagonal shape also allows the units to be
grouped in many different configurations. The plots can be placed against one another
yet still provide access to work. Each of the plots has an integrated folding chair and the
walls of the plots are at a comfortable sitting height as well. The orientation of the plots
creates a small group seating area where gardeners can see and talk to one another easily. In this way, the configuration of the plots facilitate a social connection between the
members of the community garden group. Each plot connects to another creating a small
group, the small group creates a larger group that shares adjacent utility/social space.
9.30m2 (100 ft2)
4.4
0m
f i g u r e 4 v. - J e avons 100 sf Plot Diagr am
46
(14
- 5
2.2
0m
(7
-2
0.7
5m
(30
figure 4w.- Individual Hex Plot
f i g u r e 4 y. - G a r d e n Va r i a t i o n 0 1
f i g u r e 4x.- Community Garden Sub-Group

S M A L L-GROUP GARDEN PLOTS
Those larger groups connect to other larger groups to form a community scale garden
space. The utility tables are designed at a height for working while standing. In addition,
f i g u r e 4 z . - G a r d e n Va r i a t i o n 0 2
there are stools that are stored under the table when not in use. This utility space can
become an impromptu social space for small or large groups. It can be used for a variety
of purposes including market events or other celebrations. In between the garden plots
and utility tables are smaller raised beds suitable for dwarf fruit trees or other types of nut
or berry bushes. The configuration of the plots creates different types of social and utility
spaces and could be fixed in place or moveable for greater flexibility or to adapt to spatial
pressures on the sight. In my project, there is a community garden plaza made up of 30
of these hex-plots on the South Station Street entrance to the site

The biointensive method of agriculture is based on the concept of companion
f i g u r e 4 a a . - G a r d e n Va r i a t i o n 0 3
47
planting where the garden is arranged to maximise the give and take among adjacent
plants (Jeavons, 24). The same idea can be used as a metaphor for programmatic decision making. In my project, this concept guided my planning decisions on all scales.
The decision to use this site was based primarily on the notion of re-using the viaducts to
provide a connection between the dense metro core and lower density residential areas
f i g u r e 4 b b . - Early Program Model
at the intersection of Main street. On the site scale, I felt it was important to include a
diverse program suited to the inherent character of the parcel and reinforcing or adding to
the existing local program. The parcel between Quebec and Main Streets, where the viaducts connect to the local street level, seemed better suited to industrial and service uses.
This is particularly true along Prior and Quebec Streets due to the fact that the Georgia
COMPANION PLANTING
street viaduct entrance creates a dead end condition West of Main Street. Just North of
this parcel is an electrical transfer station which limits the types of pedestrian connections.
The street level access is therefore limited to Main and Union Streets including retail store
fronts, industrial units entrances and residential lobbies. There is a loading dock and
ST R E E T
GORE
AVENU
f i g u r e 4 c c . - Ground Level Programmatic Plan Diagram
community
commercial
service
STATION
STREET
residential
48
PRIOR
STREET
IADUCT
STREET
MAI N
STREET V
STREET
GEORGIA
UCT
STREET VIAD
QUEBEC
DUNSMUIR
UNION
25m
25m
75m
waste to energy (WTE) facility that can be accessed from loading dock level and above
from the Georgia Street Viaduct extension. Underground parking access is from Quebec
Fo
1
Street as well.

1
2
2
6
4
5
The parcel between Main Street and Gore Avenue has a combination of commer-
7
8
11
10
Re
community center and a variety of educational and urban agricultural resources. Adjacent
9
12
to the community garden plaza, which serves as an entry point and passage through the
10
11
13
12
13
co-op, a seed archive, resource library, an auditorium, community kitchens and flexible
L
S
Co
15
site, are urban agriculture classrooms and demonstration plots, a tool and equipment
non-genetically modified seed strains and species biodiversity. This archive has a dedi-
S
S
M
H
14
cial, community and residential program. The community program includes a traditional
food processing spaces. The seed archive and exchange serves to preserve organic,
R
R
R
C
C
A
S
Du
16
14
15
19
C
C
17
20
18
Co
21
17
15
cated greenhouse and open-air garden plots to grow new seeds for seasonal use, and for
16
17
In
G
V
storage. The tool co-op is open to public membership and provides access to equipment
that might be too expensive for subsistence gardeners and or too large for typical urban
Ge
storage. The library could be a satellite of the Vancouver Public Library but I imagine that
18
19
20
it would have an extensive selection of titles pertaining to urban agriculture. The auditorium could be used for lectures, other cultural performances or films. It would be valuable
to have an urban agriculture design gallery as well, where designers could exhibit work
Greenhouse
that speculates about the forms urban agriculture could take in the future.
Residential
As mentioned earlier, the site is organized by a series of garden streets. These
pedestrian lanes provide access through the site along cardinal axes and offer additional
Community
street front opportunities at ground level and along the elevated Dunsmuir Street corridor
Commercial
(see figure 4ee). The main pedestrian lane at ground level is lined with residential on
Garden Corridor
one side and a mix of community and commercial program on the other. The community
Georgia St. & Base Layer
and commercial program continues up to the level of the Dunsmuir corridor and can be
accessed from the lower pedestrian lane at several points and from the underground
parking levels. The program that is placed along the lower pedestrian lanes needs special
figure 4dd.- Early Program Diagram
49
C
B
4
COMMERCIAL
COMMUNITY
COMMUNITY
RESIDENTIAL
1a
Retail Shop / Caf / Food Service
2a Community Program
3a Townhouse
1b
Commercial Greenhouse
2b Community Greenhouse
3b Residential Greenhouse
1c
Office / Studio / Conference
3b
3c Apartment / Condominium
RESIDENTIAL
3c
2a Community Program
3a Townhouse
2b Community Greenhouse
3b Residential Greenhouse
3c
3b
3c Apartment / Condominium
3c
3a
1c
1b
1a
2a
2b
1a
1a
3b
3a
2a
1a
Prior
Street
Dunsmuir
Corridor
Union
Street
garden
street
5m
f i g u r e 4 e e . - Programmatic Section BB Diagram
50
5m
15m
and community program can be placed, however

it also requires access to the sun. Because the
buildings cannot rise as high on the South side of
the development the lack of higher densities must
be supplanted by an alternative source of revenue.
The commercial greenhouse level could become
that source as well as provide businesses with an
opportunity to control their organic production supply needs with a zero transportation option.

The commercial program along Union
Street is comprised of a variety of retail shops, cafs

and restaurants on the ground level. Cafs and restaurants could be located adjacent to the residential
lobbies to take advantage of outdoor seating space.
f i g u r e 4ff.- Faade Detail
The second, third and fourth level above these shops

is dedicated to office space. Entrance to the offices
consideration so that it is compatible with the lifestyles of the residents who live directly
can be made through the residential lobbies by way
across from it. There should be a mix of service and retail that remain open into the eve-
of the shared corridor, or through street front access
ning to keep the neighborhood populated but not of the kind that would be likely to cause
between shops on Union Street. It is my belief that
late night disturbance. Most of the community program would likely close early evening,
a thoughtful mix of diverse programming could have
but there could be restaurants, cafs or bistros open later. In addition to residential food
the same beneficial effect in the city that compan-
production space, there is also dedicated growing space for specific community and com-
ion planting has in the garden. The residents of the
mercial program. I imagine that this type of development would attract they type of busi-
site would have a give and take relationship with the
ness owner who might want to grow the ingredients for the food or other products they sell
commercial and community program and all would
in their shops. If there were greenhouse space above the retail shop it would provide an
benefit from the success of the others.
additional opportunity for revenue beyond office space or residential program. In the case
of my project, the Dunsmuir Corridor provides a secondary street along which commercial
51
This project was always intended to serve a prototypical role. In addition to re-
sponding to this particular site and its context, the principles and strategies I applied to this
location can be taken and used in another place within our city and in other cities throughout North America. As more projects like this one are built, a network begins to develop
across the city. This network provides support for the nodes of which it is comprised, and
the nodes provide support for each other and the network as a whole. As the network
grows, the citys inhabitants become more sophisticated agricultural-urbanites and are on
the road to sustainable living.

Sustainability does not rest in a technology or even in a strategy such as this one.
Sustainability is personal point of view. It is a lens through which we view the world and
AGRI-URBAN NETWORK
the systems we implement to live within it. Living sustainably is a matter of understanding the input output limits of our systems and then living within our means. An urban
agricultural system can provide the opportunity to understand the natural limits of our food
system, and help us to reconnect to natural processes and to one another.

The integration of food production systems into architecture can provide oppor-
tunities for social interaction, economic security, the development of community, and the
expression of culture. All of these, in my opinion, create an urban experience worth sustaining.
f i g u r e 4 g g . - Cultivating Urban Culture
52
Each agricultural production area

within the city becomes a node within a
larger network. Each provides support to
one another and to the whole, promoting
an urban food production culture.
f i g u r e 4hh.- Agri-Urban Network
53
Anderson, Peter and Mark Anderson. Prefab Prototypes: Site-specific Design for Offsite Construction. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007.
Baikow, V.E. Sugar Series Volume 2: Manufacture and Refining of Raw Cane Sugar. 2nd Edition.
Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, 1982. 3 vols.
Beer, Anne R. Environmental Planning for Site Development. London: E. & F. N. Spon, 1990.
Billings, Keith. Master Planning for Architecture: Theory and Practice of Designing Building Complexes as Development Frameworks. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1993.
Brooks, R. Gene. Site Planning: Environment, Process, and Development. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice Hall, 1988.
Castle, Helen. Editorial. Architectural Design January/February 2008: 4-5.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
City Parks Association. City Parks Association: Timescapes. 20 April 2008 <http://www.cityparksphila.org/gallery/timescapes>.
Cornea, Serban. User-Focused Public Space, (M)UTOPIA in Denmark. Architectural Design
January/February 2008: 80-83.
Doron, Gil. Urban Agriculture: Small, Medium, Large. Architectural Design June 2005: 52-59.
Edwards, Brian, ed. Green Buildings Pay. 2nd Edition. London: Spon Press, 2003.
Faraone, Claudia and Andrea Sarti. Intermittent Cities. Architectural Design January/February
2008: 40-45.
Farret, Felix A. and M. Godoy Simes. Integration of Alternative Sources of Energy. Hoboken:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2006.
Finkelstien, J. File:Maslows hierarchy of needs.svg. Wikipedia. 23 April 2009 <http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs.svg>.
Front Studio. Front Studio. 20 April 2008 <http://www.frontstudio.com/>.
Fuller, R. Buckminster. Critical Path. New York: St. Martins Press, 1981.
54
Holland Barrs Planning Group; Lees + Associates Sustainability Ventures Group. Southeast
False Creek Urban Agriculture Strategy. Planning Report. City of Vancouver. Vancouver: City of
Vancouver, 2002.
Howard, Ebenezer. Garden Cities of To-morrow. Ed. F.J. Osborn. London: Faber and Faber, Ltd.,
1970.
Hyde, Richard, et al. The Environmental Brief. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2007.
Jeavons, John. How to Grow More Vegetables than You Ever Thought Possible on Less Land
than You Can Imagine. 3rd Edition. Berkeley: Ten Speed Press, 1982.
LeCorbusier. Concerning Town Planning. Trans. Clive Entwistle. London: The Architectural
Press, 1947.
. The Radiant City: Elements of a Doctrine of Urbanism to be used as the Basis of our
Machine-Age Civilization. Trans. Pamela Knight, Eleanor Levieux and Derek Coltman. London:
Faber & Faber, 1964
Loeb, Deenah. Urban Voids: Grounds for Change, Reimagining Philadelphias Vacant Lands.
Architectural Design January/February 2008: 68-73.
McLennan, Jason F. The Living Building Challenge, Version 1.3. Program Document. Cascadia
Region Green Building Council. Anchorage: Cascadia Region Green Building Council, 2008.
Moreno, Eduardo Lpez, et al. UN-HABITAT : Publications. unhabitat.org. 23 April 2009 <http://
www.unhabitat.org/pmss/getPage.asp?page=bookView&book=2562>.
Paturau, J. Maurice. Sugar Series Volume 11: By-products of the Cane Sugar Industry. 3rd Edition. Vol. 11. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1989. 11 vols.
Pirog, Rich and Andrew Benjamin. Checking the food odometer: Comparing food miles for local
versus conventional produce sales to Iowa institutions. Report. Leopold Center for Sustainable
Agriculture , 2003.
Pitts, Adrian. Planning and Design Strategies for Sustainablity and Profit: Pragmatic sustainable
design on building and urban scales. Amsterdam: Architectural Press, 2004.
Pope, Albert. Terminal Distribution. Architectural Design January/February 2008: 16-21.
Resh, Howard M. Hydroponic Food Production; A definitive guidebook of soilless food growing
methods. 2nd Edition. Santa Barbara: Woodbridge Press Publishing Company, 1983.
Rich, Sarah. Inhabitat: FARMADELPHIA. 20 April 2008 <http://www.inhabitat.com/2006/03/05/
farmadelphia/>.
55
Segal, Rafi and Els Verbakel. Architecture and Dispersal. Architectural Design January/February 2008: 102-107.
. Urbanism without Density. Architectural Design January/February 2008: 6-11.
Solly, Cecil. Growing Vegetables in the Pacific Northwest. no publisher data available, c. 1945.
Statistics Canada. Mode of Transportation (9), Age Groups (9) and Sex (3) for the Employed
Labour Force 15 Years and Over Having a Usual Place of Work or No Fixed Workplace Address
of Canada, Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006
Census - 20% Sample Data. Census Table. 2006.
Van der Ryn, Sim and Stuart Cowan. Ecological Design. Washington D.C.: Island Press, 1996.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
CONTINUED
Viljoen, Andr, ed. CPULs: Continuous Productive Urban Landscapes, Designing Urban Agriculture for Sustainable Cities. Amsterdam: Architectural Press, 2005.
Wall, Alex. Public Lifestyle in the Low-Density City. Architectural Design January/February
2008: 22-27.
Wickers, David. The Complete Urban Farmer. New York: The Viking Press, 1977.
Williamson, Terry, Antony Radford and Helen Bennetts. Understanding Sustainable Architecture.
London: Spon Press, 2003.
Xuereb, Marc. Food Miles: Environmental Implications of Food Imports to Waterloo Region.
Public Health Report. Waterloo: Region of Waterloo Public Health, 2005. Yeang, Ken. Bioclimatic
Skyscrapers. London: Artemis, 1994.
OTHER RESOURCES:
Vanmap: <http://vanmappub.vancouver.ca/web/html/vanmappub_mac.htm>
56
All graphics contained in this document are original or adapted from cited sources or
from Vanmap data except as listed below:
image a
Abel Improvement Association. Street Fair. abelimprovement.org. Todd Whaley. 20 April 2009
<http://www.abellimprovement.org/StreetFair.html>.
image b
Eau Claire Downtown Farmers Market. Eau Claire Downtown Farmers Market. Eau Claire
Downtown Farmers Market. uncredited. 20 April 2009 <http://ecdowntownfarmersmarket.com/>.
image j
gro dan. Class Exp Pic6.jpg. gro|dan. uncredited. 20

April 2009 <http://rw-grodan.inforce.dk/graphics/hydroponics/pictures/Misc/Class Exp Pic6.jpg>.
f i g u r e 4 v, 4 w ( i n s e t )
Drawings traced from Jeavons
figure 4gg
Drawing scanned from Jeavons, digital composite with

original photograph.
image c
Gutierrez, Raul. picnic.jpg. Mexican Pictures. 20 April 2009 <http://www.mexicanpictures.com/

archives/photos/china/picnic.jpg>.
image d
Skating on the Rideau Canal.jpg. Sweetshots. 20 April 2009 <http://www.bellcold.com/SweetShots/Skating%20on%20the%20Rideau%20Canal.JPG>.
IMAGE CREDITS
image e
Appelbaum, Alec. City Names Trump Vet High Line Chief. 11 January 2007. New York Magazine. 20 April 2009 <http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2007/01/city_names_trump_vet_high_line_1.
html>.
image f
Flickr. Flickr File Download: Millenium Bridge. 11 February 2008. Flickr. Kalle Anka. 20 April
2009 <http://www.flickr.com/photos/astroboi/2259014111/sizes/l/>.
image g
BBC Nottingham. 02_470x300.jpg. 06 September 2006. BBC Nottingham. uncredited. 20 April

2009 <http://www.bbc.co.uk/nottingham/content/images/2006/06/09/02_470x300.jpg>.
image h
howstuffworks.com. greenhouse-gardening0.jpg. How Stuff Works. uncredited. 20 April 2009

<http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/rd/greenhouse-gardening0.jpg>.
image i
Erika y Scott. Greenhouse Winter.jpg. erikayscott.com. uncredited. 20 April 2009 <http://erikayscott.com/Photos/Agriculture/GreenhouseWinter.jpg>.
57
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM
READING ROOM AUTHORIZATION

In presenting this report in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the advanced degree in the Architecture Program
at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Architecture Reading Room shall make it freely available for
reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this report for scholarly purposes may be
granted by the Chair of Architecture or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this
thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.
Christopher Scappaticci
Name of Author:
Date:
Signature
agri urban culture
Title:
Degree:
Program:
April 13, 2009
Master of Architecture
Architecture
2009
Year of Graduation Ceremony:

Agri - Urban - Culture

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Agri - Urban - Culture

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

ag r i u r ban culture

BA Fine Art, 1993, Kings College

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

Sustainability means conserving a balance within a system by avoiding depletion

of connected resources or capacities. In architectural terms, this refers to ecological as

Maslows Hierarchy of Needs

Residential Energy Use

Linear System Flow

Cyclical System Loop

Howards Garden City Diagrammatic

Ville Vert Plan

Ville Verte Sections

Farmadelphia Aerial View

37 Yearly Vegetable Intake (Hydroponic)

39 Percent of Yearly Fruit & Vegetable

Intake Produced on Site by Production

Concentric Rings of Sustainability

40 Residential Ground Level Plan

41 Building Integrated Greenhouse Sec-

Daily Transit Users by Transit Type

tion Perspective EE, Exterior Social

North East View

42 Residential Mid-Level Plan

South West View

Summer and Winter Sun Angles

Plan Area Calculations

44 Residential Top Level Plan

Building Integrated Greenhouse

45 Rooftop Greenhouse Section EE,

Key Plan, Detail

Garden Street Section AA

Avg. N. Am. Diet by Food Type,

46 Jeavons 100 sf Plot Diagram,

47 Community Garden Sub-Groupings,

48 Early Program Model, Ground Level

Ecological Footprint of Food

49 Early Program Diagram

Production by Food Type

50 Programmatic Section Diagram BB

Space Needed to Produce a Fam-

ilys Yearly Soft Fruit and Vegetable

52 Cultivating Urban Culture

Intake by Production Method

Yearly Vegetable Intake (Biointesive)

undefinable value to me.

Sustainability means conserving a balance within a system by avoiding depletion

of connected resources or capacities. In architectural terms, this refers to ecological as

The average distance that

farm to fork in North

to farm close to home (Viljoen, 41). Pressure for

self-esteem, confidence, achievement,

friendship, family, colleagues, neighbors,

security of body, of employment, of resources,

air, water, food, sleep, excretion, sex

figure 1b. Abraham Maslows Hierarc h y o f N e e d s

figure 1c. Residential Energy Use

Food-Waste-Energy Production Loop

figure 1e. Cyclical Systems Loop

f i g u r e 2a. Howards Garden Ci ty Diagrammatic Plan No. 3

cultural land. The public buildings formed the first

f i g u r e 2 b. Vi l l e Verte Plan Detail

figure 2d. Ville Verte Sections

f i g u r e 2f. Vertical Farm