Agriburbia™: What do you think?

This is an excerpt from the Agriburbia™ website…

The Agriburbia™ Concept    http://www.agriburbia.com/     Agriburbia™ is an innovative and growing design movement that integrates aspects of agrarianism with land development.  Agriburbia™ includes characteristics of New Urbanism, modernism and historic preservation, and other environmentally sustainable principles of real estate development. Agriburbia™ combines the positive social, cultural, physical and financial characteristics from both the urban and rural lifestyles to create an entirely new landuse concept.  Agriburbia™ integrates food production as an integral element in the community design, social network, and financial viability of the neighborhood. Agriburbia™ promotes and supports the following policies and principles in each mixed-use community: Agricultural Production:  No loss of agricultural value or revenue (“Green Fields” development), or production of 30% of dietary requirements of the project or equivalent cash from sales crops, or combination thereof. Locally Grown Food:  Production of a significant portion (30 to 50%) of dietary requirements grown within or in the immediate surrounding area of the community Conserves and Promotes Natural Resources:  Appropriate and efficient use of natural resources to provide housing, transportation, recreation and fresh food through creative, harmonious land planning and landscape architecture for the community.  This includes use of alternative energy sources as well as land and water. Self Sufficiency:  Provide a commercially viable opportunity for enhanced self- sufficiency for community residents, tenants, and guests. Sustainable Energy Practices :  Integrate solar and geothermal technology to provide sustainable energy sources for the community. Financing:  Incorporate established entities (Metropolitan Districts, HOAs) to finance both traditional infrastructure (streets, water, sewer) and environmentally friendly agricultural infrastructure (drip irrigation)

 

Example Agriburbia™ Design Project An example of the Agriburbia™ land planning design is this 640-acre parcel in Southern Weld County, Colorado.  It includes for 980 homes, including multi-family town homes to two (2) acre permaculture home sites.      Each Agriburbia™ mixed-use campus is centered on an agrarian concept where traditional suburban landscaping and open space is replaced with orchards, vineyards, and other perennial crops for the benefit of the neighborhood and surrounding communities. A limited amount of active recreation area is provided. The balance of the open space is designed as productive organic agricultural landscape. These lands will be owned and actively managed by the Home Owner’s Association (HOA) or Metropolitan Districts. Private farm contracts will be awarded for these prime, organic agricultural parcels. It is anticipated thatAgriburbia™ will provide agricultural opportunities within and outside the community. In addition to this shared resource, each mixed-use campus is designed to have a significant number of home sites capable of useful agricultural production. Infrastructure such as non-potable water will be provided for these privates home sites. The home owner will have the option to participate in the community agriculture production. The positive and productive results of and Agriburbia™ mixed-use campus will be the combination of public and private production of agricultural products for the community and neighboring communities.

 

So what do you think about Agriburbia™?

Is this a good thing?  The next step to getting local agriculture to suburban neighborhoods or is this just a good ol’ American quick fix?  I mean, its even two words glued together- American dream style. My instinct tells me anything that’s trademarked probably is corporate, money grabbing, and something I want to stay away from, but I’m interested in this concept.  

I got the Agriburbia™ idea from the awesome community food listserve. Rob Jones, of Loudoun County, VA, responded to the email raising questions about the proposed project.  Is this concept truly trademark-able considering the many, many times that gardens have been planned into communities in the past? What about the water supply for this new community and its farms and gardens.  Would water rights need to be bought?  If so, the community can certainly not be called self-sufficient.  He also wondered about wastewater and the effects of disturbing the native soils, all valid concerns.  Finally, He maintain “A major component in all of this is a government with a balanced, progressive vision, as all of us have surely experienced on some level.”  Bravo Rob, I agree with you entirely.

As for me, I have to wonder about the whole thing.  Agriburbia™ is just a concept to bring agriculture to suburbia, it is a temporary solution. I think that it could have to potential to contribute to suburban sprawl. Suburban neighborhoods are often defined by low population density and a few pedestrian routes.  Wikipedia actually has a pretty good site about suburban sprawla.

I think the main problem is that we Americans are caught up in the idea of suburbia, just as were are in love with the idea of the lawn which I talk about in my article about Fritz Haeg.  What we need is to get away from suburbia and from lawns. We need to stop sprawl, consolidate and use all of the spaces in the urban centers before we continue to grow outward.  One way to do this is to plan urban growth boundaries into cities.  

An urban growth boundary is a regional boundary, set in an attempt to control urbanization by designating the area inside the boundary for higher density urban development and the area outside for lower density rural development. Right now Oregon, Washington, and Tennessee require that their cities create urban growth boundaries.  Thats not very many cities.  Also, Boulder, CO; Twin Cities, MN; Virginia Beach, VA; Lexington, KT; and San Francisco Bay area, CA have urban growth boundaries of one sort or another.

People living in cities have a smaller carbon footprint than those living in the country- they often do no have or use vehicles regularly, their houses are smaller, meaning less heat and electricity per space, and they live in much more tightly packed spaces.  Also, if people were concentrated in urban centers than food distribution (hopefully local) could be more efficient.

Of course, its easy for me to say that people should live in more tightly packed communities, I was privileged enough to grow up on a farm in rural Maryland.  How can I, who grew up with 6 fields, orchards, and a creek, judge people who just want to get out of the city and have a front yard for their children?  Where do we draw the line between happiness and sacrifice for the environment (and our future generations)?  How about healthier and better planned cities!

Check out this PDF about urban growth boundaries in California.

Here’s the website for Greenbelt Alliance of the San Francisco Bay area.

Click here to learn more about the urban growth boundary around Portland, OR.

Portland, OR is pretty amazing in terms of city planning.  I’ve talked with an alum of my school who is an urban planner out there.  She worked on the Diggable City, a planning project that plans urban agriculture into urban communities.  Check it out- its amazing!  It deserves a post of its own when I find out more about it.

Here’s the final report on the Diggable City Project.

 

And here’s some more links about cities, urban planning, carbon footprints, and all the rest.

Cyurbia, an urban planning community.

Urban and Ecological Footprints.

Carbon Footprints.

Ecological Footprint 2.0

 

 

 

Depression Relief Gardens: 1930-1938

Youngstown Depression Relief Gardens, 1932.

The Great Depression struck the the United States at the end of 1929 and lasted until 1939. This economic disaster affected the economy of the entire world and put hundreds of thousands out of work and in serious financial trouble. City government, realizing the seriousness of the situation, put relief gardening programs in place to combat hunger, poverty, and emotional stress (Williamson). These relief gardens, also called welfare garden plots, vacant lot gardens, and subsistence gardens, served the same purpose as the potato patches of the 1890′s: they improved the health and spirit of participants by creating feelings of usefulness, productivity, and importance while also providing opportunities for food and work. (Tucker 1993)

There were three phases of gardening programs during the Great Depression. In the beginning the relief garden movement faced many problems. Organizers argued about the size and and make-up of gardens: Should the gardens have individual plots or larger undivided plots? Who should be involved? Where will the plots be? Many wondered if the depression would even last long enough for the relief gardens to be necessary. Those asking for assistance were no long the disable, sick, and elderly, but the unemployed and desperate, many with families. No longer was it the ‘weakness’ of the individual that caused the need for assistance, this time it was the failure of the ‘system’ (Warman 1999). During these early years ordinary citizens were incredibly helpful in supporting gardening programs. For example, in Detroit “city employees donated monthly contributions from their salaries to raise the ten thousand dollars necessary for financing a free garden program” (Tucker 1993: 132).

Hard at work in Youngstown Depression Gardens, 1932

These disagreements and organizational challenges hindered the program in its beginning years, but were resolved by 1933. By this time, non-governmental organizations such as the Family Welfare Society and the Employment Relief Commission formed garden committees to help combat hunger. Those with land of their own were encouraged to cultivate it instead of taking up valuable gardening space in the overflowing relief gardens. Seeds and supplies were provided for those working the gardens. Many farmers disliked the welfare garden program, thinking that it maintained the economic depression by adding to the overproduction already taking place (Warman 1999).

Relief Gardens helped the Beuscher family survive in Iowa during the Depression

In 1933, Franklin Delano Roosevelt became the president of the United States bringing with him his “New Deal.” Over the next three years, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA) gave over three billion dollars of aid in their work garden program. Gardeners received a wage for cultivating and distributing produce to those in need. These gardeners, however, had to meet strict eligibility requirements to participate. The work garden program shifted relief gardens from being for anyone in need to being jobs for some. This program lasted until 1935. An addition to the federal gardening program individual gardening programs continued cities around the country. In New York City, a gardening campaign led by the welfare department and helped by the Works Progress Administration (WPA), resulted in the formulation of over 5,000 gardens in vacant lots (Warner 1987). These 5,000 gardens produced $5 worth of vegetables for every dollar invested resulting in a total of $2.8 million worth of food by 1934 (Tucker 1993).

Clarke Bennert tilling an urban greenhouse

Image from Columbia Historical Society, Inc

In 1935 the government cut funding for relief gardening programs because they were no longer viewed as as opportunities for success and improvement of life. After this remarkably successful period of relief gardening, these urban kitchen gardens returned to their initial view as a method of coping with poverty for those who were lazy, disabled or elderly. Their named shifted from relief gardens to welfare gardens, giving them a much more pitiful connotation. However, the country’s experience with the success of relief gardens in the early 1930′s made them much more open to the idea of victory gardens in World War II (Bassett 1981).

References for Relief Gardens

Warman, Dena Sacha. 1999.Community Gardens: A Tool for Community Building. Senior Honours Essay, University of Waterloo. http://www.cityfarmer.org/waterlooCG.html#2.

Gardenmosaics.org. History of Community Gardens in the U.S. http://www.gardenmosaics.cornell.edu/pgs/science/english/pdfs/historycg_science_page.pdf

Williamson, Erin A. A Deeper Ecology: Community Gardens in the Urban Environment. U Delaware. http://www.cityfarmer.org/erin.html

Really great paper found of the City Farmer website, it has great background and history and incite into the need for and role of community gardens in North America.

Lawson, Laura. 2005. City Bountiful: A Century of Community Gardening in America. University of California Press.

Tucker, David M. Kitchen Gardening in America: A History. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1993.

Warner, Sam Bass, Jr. To Dwell is to Garden: A History of Boston’s Community Gardens. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1987.

Wikipedia. The Great Depression in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression_in_the_United_States

Five Families in Dubuque: The Urban Depression 1937-1938. 2003. University of Northern Iowa. http://www.uni.edu/iowahist/Social_Economic/Urban_Depression/urban_depression.htm#Park%20Family%20Interview%20January%201938

Ohio Historical Society. Great Depression Scrapbook-The Country & The City. http://omp.ohiolink.edu/OMP/YourScrapbook?scrapid=31028.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::