4. The current trend in uncertainty con-
cerning food growth and production
has spurned increasing unease among
people throughout the world and
questions regarding food security are
rising. A renewed desire to depart from
big agriculture has led many people
back to community agriculture practic-
es in an effort to regain tangibility, con-
trol and security over food sources and
food quality.
In the urban sector this often comes to
fruition through community gardens
and collective urban farming. The ag-
gregate term "urban agriculture"
includes many forms of agriculture,
however this project will focus specifi-
cally on edible urban forests and urban
orchards, or urban arboriculture.
Given both the increasing interest and
potential concerns of implementing
urban arboriculture systems, this ap-
plied research seeks to address the
successful design, planning and place-
ment of urban food systems. The goal
of these systems is not to only achieve
a successful food harvest but to ulti-
mately attain and sustain a sense of
place. Therefore, through examinina-
tion of varying urban arboriculture strat-
egies I seek to design a system to be
integrated into the community of South
Oakland.
The design process includes deriving
successful elements from previously
implemented systems, defining co-op-
erative use of space, and allowing for
innovation, while striving to uphold
existing neighborhood values and char-
acter. Simultaneously, I am working to
create a sense of permanence, con-
nectivity, productivity and ecological
health.
The Food Forest of South Oakland will
consider the impact of such systems on
the local urban ecology, community,
economy and aesthetics of the current
neighborhood. The ultimate goal of this
system is to achieve site longevity
which can be defined by successful
investments for the future overall health
and vitality of the site and its residents.
ENGLEWOOD,CHICAGO
food in the city
5. The following is the study and applica-
tion of urban agroforestry in site design
and its implications pertaining to
place-keeping and community sustain-
ability. The goal of these systems is to
establish permaculture food sources in
the urban context.
The proposed project explores efforts
to develop parameters for the suggest-
ed agricultural systems within the urban
fabric, while specifically focusing on
design strategies and aesthetics that
will assure longevity, community bonds,
and contextual relevance of future
urban arboricultural systems, specifi-
cally within the community of South
Oakland.
This design will focus specifically on the
lastingness vitality of place. Through
site design, we can use urban agricul-
ture as a tool for strengthening commu-
nities, bolstering healthier citizens,
increasing property values, reducing
crime, and an avenue for reconnecting
with nature.
The implementation of a successful
urban fruit production system involves
careful, long term land-use planning.
Since fruit producing trees take several
years to mature and yield a crop, care-
ful design is paramount in the success
of these systems. However, communi-
ty based efforts do not always have
access to professional design services
and not all urban environments are
equally suited for agricultural produc-
tion. Therefore, a careful study of the
relationship between theory and appli-
cation is necessary to access future po-
tentials of this current line of thinking.
This is a prevalent topic in Landscape
Architecture because urban agriculture
has been increasingly cited as a
remedy for specific urban ills (Gus-
tafson 2012). Currently, many projects
regarding urban agriculture are spread-
ing across the nation in an effort to
bring food security and health back in to
urban neighborhoods. Urban farming
provides beneficial produce to urban
dwellers, however in a semi-imperma-
nent fashion. Vegetable gardens
require yearly replanting and continual
maintenance, and are often mobile
from site to site given the use of raised
beds. Focusing on the implementation
of an urban edible forest ensures the
lasting effects of food production in the
city as they represent a long term com-
mitment and an annual resource.
BROOKLYNGRANGE
6. ALMOND/CLOVERCALIFORNIA
Perennial growth encourages sustained
use of the site. A significant measure of
time and energy is exerted by land-
scape planners and designers into
place-making and developing high
quality public spaces (Dempsey and
Burton 2012). However, often times,
foresight for long term management or
life cycle of the project is not fully or un-
der-realized. The notion of a self-sus-
taining (self-weeding, -watering, -nour-
ishing) is desirable in site design as it
leads to aesthetic pleasure and pro-
motes longevity of space.
While cities begin to proclaim land-
scaping projects and contributions as
being positive for the health and happi-
ness of the community many of these
efforts succumb to poorly sustained
management and maintenance prac-
tices as time passes. It is suggested
that these outcomes are not for lack of
want for a place to succeed, but rather
it is a lack of understanding for what a
site truly needs, deserves and can
physically support (Dempsey and
Burton).
This line of thinking urges the designer
to focus on the design holistically, con-
sidering its entire lifecycle. Place-keep-
ing as opposed to place-making drives
the concept of informed design. There-
fore, perennial vegetation is extremely
important in the implementation of an
urban edible forest. These landscapes
take several years of maturation to pro-
duce their desired crop and provide
other benefits like canopy and water
retaining root systems.
New urban forests and orchards can be
planted in a day and last decades, but
the interim time spent in that space,
keeping what was visioned on track, is
what makes or breaks the project's
successand site compatibility. The im-
plementation of urban orchards or
edible urban forestry requires fore-
thought and careful planning to ensure
multi-decade success, proliferation,
and appreciation for the initial efforts
put forth.
The planting of fruit and nut trees should be holistically approached through
the community and through careful assessment for socio-economic stability,
ecological benefits, and agricultural bounty. ‘Producing trees’ should be
employed for their benefits by implementing thoughtful site design and
maintenance parameters, ensuring their permanence and ability to thrive.
7. The use of arboriculture design in the
urban atmosphere is a way of recon-
vening the natural with the cultural in
places where barriers exist between
the two. Successful connections are
reached by way of creating visually
pleasing, orderly, and functional
arrangements for nature that satisfy the
cultural demand for attractive and
structured environments. Through my
reasearch I found one author who even
goes on to suggest the wildly intriguing
concept that environmental policy
should explicitly address the physical
appearance of the landscape because
users make inferences about a loca-
tion’s ecological quality based simply
upon the look of the land.
Another author touches upon the im-
portance of community controlled food
production and involvement, the use of
permaculture standards from an eco-
logical standpoint and from a cultural
sense of permanence through the im-
plementation of futuristic goals, as well
as rehabilitative connectivity through
green urban infill projects. I believe
that if this continues to grow as popular
consensus we will all benefit greatly
from the generation of customizable
systems to retrofit more and more
urban communities to increase their
access to and implementation of urban
agricultural systems.
“ agroforestry and other forms of
urban agriculture will be the future
normative behavior of urban dwellers”
-Tracey 2011
KYLEMOREABBEY,SCOTLANDLINDISFARNECASTLE,ENGLANDLEXINGTON,KENTUCKY
9. Urban forestry's roots date back to an-
cient Chinese, western Asian, and
Greek civilizations (Jellicoe 1985).
Many ancient cities incorporated highly
developed parks, gardens, and other
green spaces 3,000 years ago.
Throughout the years style and use
have evolved from classical and formal
styles in the Persian and Greek civiliza-
tions in 5th century B.C. to cultural or
recreational use in 17th and 18th centu-
ry Europe.
The rise in the use of trees in urban
design truly became noticeable in the
1800s in Paris, known for its famously
tree-lined streets. These practices were
also later observed in communities in
Latin America, most likely under Span-
ish influence, in the form of interior
patios in urban housing and public
planted plazas in urban centers
(Kuchelmeister and Braatz 1993). In
the past, however, it is evident that the
implementation of and care for trees or
forests in the urban environment has
had largely a spiritual or aesthetic ob-
jective, rather than a utilitarian one.
In America's settlements forests were
often deemed unfavorable, as they oc-
cupied prime cropland or were cleared
for the development of urban areas.
The modern concept of urban forestry
was introduced in between the years of
1965-68 when the Citizens Advisory
Committee on Recreation and Natural
Beauty recommended to the U.S. gov-
ernment that The Urban and Communi-
ty Forestry Program be formed in the
United States Forest Service (Deneke
and Grey 1992).
Legislation continued to perpetuate the
growth of the urban forest initiative
through the 1990s leading to positive
growth in both involvement and imple-
mentation of urban greening. However,
recent studies have revealed that urban
forest ecosystems are under threat due
to population rises, decreases in fund-
ing, dwindling interest, reduced lack of
open urban space, and environmental
conditions (U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture 2012).
In 2009-10 a prominent upheaval of
renewed interest in urban forestry is ob-
served (American Forests 2013). New
or reaffirmed interest is sparked as the
green initiative becomes more and
more globally popular. As urban areas
continue to fight urban blight, unhealthy
environments, and diminished food
security, the reintroduction of green
infrastructure has become an ever
more crucial topic. Proper, insightful
design of these systems is what allows
them to be agriculturally productive,
environmentally beneficial, promote
socio-economic health, and provide
aesthetic pleasure. Therefore, under-
standing tenable goals reached by pre-
viously implemented systems is imper-
ative.
1) 13TH CENTURY AZTEC ‘CHINAMPAS’
2) 15TH CENTURY FRANCE
3) 16TH CENTURY ENGLAND
4) 14TH CENTURY ROME
10. theoretical contextAs set forth by the community devel-
oped master plan Oakland 2025, park
and trail connections, housing and
open space strategies, community
vibrancy, and home-ownership are all
of paramount importance. Interest has
been clearly exhibited by the research
and suggested actions documented in
the Master Plan. An urban agroforestry
system designed and integrated within
the context of South Oakland makes
logical sense and its benefits are
aligned with current assets and future
desires. Public and Private funding is
available and has already been attained
on a small level from the national
non-profit Alliance for Community
Trees, who funded Tree Pittsburgh and
The Oakland Green Team for their cur-
rent South Oakland project.
Systems and aesthetics from program
to form to material will be in sync with
historical practices and past communi-
ty character/ vernacular.
South Oakland Food Forest will uphold
parameters defined under the umbrella
theory “site longevity”.
I have developed this
phrase in an effort to
comprise properties and
characteristics of site
design and performance
that uphold tenants of
lastingness, prosperity
and permanence
13. ALLEGHENYCOUNTY
OPDC2025SUGGESTIONS
Pittsburgh was born through industry
and manufacturing, but has trans-
formed into an adaptive and diverse
urban arena. The city now offers a vari-
ety of opportunities and successes via
health and research industries, bank-
ing, finance, and technology markets,
education, scientific, and engineering
frontiers, as well as many social, recre-
ational, and cultural engagements.
Like many modern cities, Pittsburgh is
experiencing an era of regrowth. A de-
cline in both population and use of
urban heavy industrial sites created
vacant pockets of unused commercial,
residential, and industrial acreage that
now face a new life as the city under-
goes revitalization. Housing, retail, and
commercial prospects are breaking out
across the city as well and several
green and open space initiatives.
Oakland is the academic and health-
care hub of Pittsburgh, one of the city's
major cultural centers, and is Pennsyl-
vania's third largest "Downtown”.
“With it’s hillside views, portal connec-
tions, and potential connectionsto parks
trails, the South Oakland neighborhood
should be preserved as vibrant community
for single families. The Oakland 2025 plan
proposes number of housing, and open
space strategies to strengthen the resi-
dential neighborhood. Developing neigh-
borhood serving retail strategy for the
neighborhood.”
-OPDC Master Plan 2025
14. Analysis demonstrates South Oak-
land’s ability to offer lower market rates
on housing than neighboring sites. The
neighborhood displays the capacity to
provide for innovative growth through
quality sustainable design and housing
opportunities. Increasing home-owner-
ship strengthens permanence and
stimulates a more robust sense of
place and overall community.
South Oakland is sometimes misrepre-
sented as an extension of Central Oak-
land and as such, it is assumed that is
is mainly a student neighborhood, but
in fact, only 36.9% of its population is
between the ages of 18 and 24, com-
pared to Central Oakland’s 74.1%.
OPDC 2025 (Oakland Planning & Devle-
lopment Corp. Master Plan 2025) calls
for the escalation of this trend as it sug-
gests certain parts of South Oakland to
be rehabilitated to encourage home
ownership. Their plan suggests “inno
vative and sustainable housing
choices.”
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME: $31,154
MEDIAN HOUSE OR CONDO VALUE: $72,935
MEDIAN CONTRACT RENT: $522
UNEMPLOYMENT: 8.5%
RESIDENTS BELOW THE POVERTY LEVEL: 23%
MEDIAN RESIDENT AGE: 42
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME: $34,583
MEDIAN HOUSE OR CONDO VALUE: $91,403
MEDIAN CONTRACT RENT: $554
UNEMPLOYMENT: 7%
RESIDENTS BELOW THE POVERTY LEVEL: 29%
MEDIAN RESIDENT AGE: 35
This plan provides multi-unit
complexes to house Co-Op
farmers while simultaneously
creating 20 new 1/8 acre resi-
dential plots to extend the
food forest systems.
These developments increase
ownership/population, sup-
port growth of community &
foster interest in agroforesry.
A system of permanence.
WITHIN THE PROPOSED
LIMIT OF WORK
THERE ARE CURRENTLY
APPROXIMATELY:
1,690
RESIDENTS
LIVING IN
757
UNITS
SOUTH OAKLAND
FOOD FOREST PLAN
ADDS:
100-200
RESIDENTS
WITH ADDITION OF
44
UNITS
housing CURRENT DEMOGRAPHICS FOR
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS
11.8% population increase
17.7% increase in housing units
16. master plan
P
250 FRUIT & NUT TREES
330 PERENNIAL SHRUBS/ BRAMBLES/ VINES
10 BLOCKS INFRASTRUCTURE RENOVATION
9.5 ACRES PUBLIC SPACE RECLAMATION
3.5 ACRES OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
20 SINGLE HOMES - 1/8 ACRE PLOTS EACH
4 MULTI-RESIDENCE HOMES - 24 UNITS
100-200 PERSON GROWTH IN POPULATION
40 SOLAR PANELS
2 GREENHOUSES
2 COMMUNITY OUTREACH CENTERS
10 BEEHIVES
1 CHICKEN COOP
1 PUBLIC COMPOST SITE
2 ACRES BIO-DIVERSE OPEN SPACE
1 ACRE RAISED VEGETABLE BEDS
281 PERMEABLE PARKING SPACES
19. GOALS:
I. NEIGHBORHOOD RECLAMATION THROUGH
EDIBLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
II. CREATE SYSTEMATIC PRODUCTION CYCLES
COMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENT NEEDS.
III. INCREASE HOME-OWNERSHIP AND
SITE-PERMANENCE.
Inventory & Analysis:
Identify misused and under utilized
urban zones
-street scapes
-terminal blocks
-alleys
-vacant lots
-unkempt public open space
Design:
Apply associative character to each zone.
Define transitions through site.
Delineate new parameters for vacancies
and open spaces.
Implementation:
Encourage user buy-in (e.g. Co-Op Housing)
Education of residents.
Work. Harvest. Distribute. Celebrate.
32. “Place-Keeping Through
Urban Agroforestry”:
A Research Proposal for the Implementation of
Edible Urban Forest Systems in South Oakland
Abigail Brehm, MLA Candidate
Instructor: Rich Rauso
Chatham University
Fall 2014 – Spring 2015
33. Abstract
This capstone proposal involves the study and application of urban agroforestry in site design and
its implications pertaining to place-keeping and community sustainability. The proposal
addresses the purpose, objective, and justification of edible urban forestry systems. The goal of
these systems is to establish permaculture food sources in the urban context and assumes
community involvement is essential throughout the design process. Current theories of urban
arboriculture and ecology are analyzed in an effort to develop parameters for the proposed
implementation of agricultural systems within the urban fabric. While practice of urban
agroforestry continues to grow, this research will focuses more specifically on design strategies
and aesthetics that will assure longevity, community bonds, and contextual relevance of future
urban arboricultural systems, specifically within the community of South Oakland.
1.1 Introduction & Theoretical Context
Current impalpability concerning food growth and production has spurned increasing
unease among people throughout the world and has raised questions regarding food security.
A renewed desire to depart from big agriculture has led many people back to community
agriculture practices in an effort to regain control and security over food sources and food quality
(Cockrall-King 2012). In the urban sector this often comes to fruition through community
gardens and collective urban farming. The aggregate term "urban agriculture" includes many
forms of agriculture, however this proposal will focus specifically on edible urban forests and
urban orchards, or urban arboriculture.
Urban arboriculture is defined as "the cultivation, management, and study of individual
trees, shrubs, vines, and other perennial woody plants" in an urban environment (Harris 1983, 2).
It is simultaneously a practice and a science. "The science of arboriculture studies how these
plants grow and respond to cultural practices and to their environment. The practice of
arboriculture includes cultural techniques such as selection, planting, training, fertilization, pest
and pathogen control, pruning, shaping, and removal" (Harris 1983, 3). Edible urban forests
are sustainable food production systems in the city that yield produce directly beneficial to
human nutrition in a low cost, low maintenance woodland ecosystem (Hart 1996). Urban
orchards are described similarly, regarding their food production and benefits, however they
adopt a more formal and tidy layout as opposed to a denser and layered woodland ecosystem
(Cockrall-King 2012).
34. The primary concern regarding urban edible forests and urban orchards is the issue of
organic waste materials as hazards or aesthetic displeasure due to lack of maintenance or
improper design and planning. Orchards have come to be known as troublesome seed and fruit
polluters to citizens and policy makers (McClain 2012). Residents complain that common
street trees that produce fruits or nuts fall all too often on their cars, in the street and on the
sidewalk, leaving them to believe they are of a hazard either to their health (via falling or
slipping on pods, leaves, or branches), to their cosmetic desires (via staining carpets, shoes,
sidewalks, and littering cars), and to their safety (clogged storm drains flooding, slippery leaves
on the streets, heavy branches falling) (Barker 1986).
Given both the increasing interest and potential concerns of implementing urban
arboriculture systems, this research seeks to address the successful design, planning and
placement of urban food systems. The goal of these systems is not to only achieve a successful
food harvest but to ultimately attain and sustain a sense of place. Therefore, this applied
research proposes to examine varying urban arboriculture strategies in an effort to design a
system to be integrated into the community of South Oakland. The research will work to derive
successful elements of previously implemented systems and will strive to uphold current
neighborhood values while simultaneously working to create a sense of permanence,
connectivity, and ecological health. The project will consider the impact of such systems on the
local urban ecology, community, economy and aesthetics of the current neighborhood.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this research is to analyze past and current models of urban arboriculture
while building a clearer understanding of successful practices. This study will ideally inform
future projects and systems to be implemented in South Oakland and will focus specifically on
issues of longevity, vitality and place. Within the literature, urban food production is portrayed
as a tool for strengthening communities, bolstering healthier citizens, increasing property values,
reducing crime, and an avenue for reconnecting with nature (Tracey 2011). Urban arboriculture
increases biodiversity in what is often an urban monoculture, and reduces storm water runoff,
among a great many other benefits, including improving air quality, reducing UV rays, traffic
calming, and noise reduction (Alliance for Community Trees 2011).
35. 1.3 Objectives
The primary design objective of this capstone project is to apply the lessons learned from
the existing urban agriculture literature in a proposed site design. This application of the
identified principles will allow me to interpret the potential opportunities and constraints of the
theory. The implementation of a successful urban fruit production system involves careful,
long term land-use planning. Since fruit producing trees take several years to mature and yield
a crop, careful design is paramount in the success of these systems. However, community
based efforts do not always have access to professional design services and not all urban
environments are equally suited for agricultural production. Therefore, a careful study of the
relationship between theory and application is necessary to access future potentials of this
current line of thinking.
This is a prevalent topic in Landscape Architecture because urban agriculture has been
increasingly cited as a remedy for specific urban ills (Gustafson 2012). Currently, many
projects regarding urban agriculture are spreading across the nation in an effort to bring food
security and health back in to urban neighborhoods. Urban farming provides beneficial produce
to urban dwellers, however in a semi-impermanent fashion. Vegetable gardens require yearly
replanting and continual maintenance, and are often mobile from site to site given the use of
raised beds. Focusing on the implementation of an urban edible forest ensures the lasting
effects of food production in the city as they represent a long term commitment and an annual
resource. Furthermore, the community of South Oakland has already expressed their interest in
benefitting from an urban orchard and has since received 8 fruit trees, a project discussed later, in
Section 2.3.
2.1 Literature Review
Urban forestry's roots date back to ancient Chinese, western Asian, and Greek
civilizations (Jellicoe 1985). Many ancient cities incorporated highly developed parks, gardens,
and other green spaces 3,000 years ago. Throughout the years style and use have evolved from
classical and formal styles in the Persian and Greek civilizations in 5th century B.C. to cultural
or recreational use in 17th and 18th century Europe. The rise in the use of trees in urban
36. landscape design truly became noticeable in the 1800s in Paris, known for its famously tree-lined
streets. These practices were also later observed in communities in Latin America, most likely
under Spanish influence, in the form of interior patios in urban housing and public planted plazas
in urban centers (Kuchelmeister and Braatz 1993). In the past, however, it is evident that the
implementation of and care for trees or forests in the urban environment has had largely a
spiritual or aesthetic objective, rather than a utilitarian one.
In America's settlements forests were often deemed unfavorable, as they occupied prime
cropland or were cleared for the development of urban areas (Deneke and Grey 1992). The
urban plots were then re-sown with individual or shared gardens and replanted with foreign seeds
brought over by the settlers from Europe, a nostalgic nod to familiar species. By the 19th
century the first horticultural societies began to pop up and trees for city streets and urban green
spaces became popular topics spearheaded by Andrew Jackson Downing and Frederick Law
Olmsted (Deneke and Grey 1992).
Throughout the Great Depression and World War I and II urban forestry and urban
agriculture played an important role as well. President Roosevelt’s “New Deal” in 1933 was an
effort to alleviate the economic tensions brought on by the Depression. Through the New Deal
the Civilian Conservation Corps was created which employed 3 million men and resulted in the
planting of 3 billion trees in both urban and rural settings (Merrill 1981). In addition, during
the World Wars there was a public push for citizens to plant vegetable, fruit, and herb gardens.
Citizens were provoked to plant in both publically shared spaces and residential spaces to reduce
the food stress due to agricultural halts and military demand (Department of Agriculture 1942).
The modern concept of urban forestry was introduced in between the years of 1965-68
when the Citizens Advisory Committee on Recreation and Natural Beauty recommended to the
U.S. government that The Urban and Community Forestry Program be formed in the United
States Forest Service (Deneke and Grey 1992). Legislation continued to perpetuate the growth
of the urban forest initiative through the 1990s leading to positive growth in both involvement
and implementation of urban greening. However, recent studies have revealed that urban forest
ecosystems are under threat due to population rises, decreases in funding, dwindling interest,
reduced lack of open urban space, and environmental conditions (U.S. Department of
Agriculture 2012).
37. In 2009-10 a prominent upheaval of renewed interest in urban forestry is observed
(American Forests 2013). New or reaffirmed interest is sparked as the green initiative becomes
more and more globally popular. As urban areas continue to fight urban blight, unhealthy
environments, and diminished food security, the reintroduction of green infrastructure has
become an ever more crucial topic. Proper, insightful design of these systems is what allows
them to be agriculturally productive, environmentally beneficial, promote socio-economic health,
and provide aesthetic pleasure. Therefore, understanding tenable goals reached by previously
implemented systems is imperative.
2.1.1 Agriculture terms and ideas
In Planning the Food Secure City Dominec Vitiello contemplates the concept of an urban
foodshed (Vitiello 2012). The term is derived from W.P. Hedden's How Great Cities are Fed
who defines a foodshed as the processes through which food passes that "guides the flow of food
from producer to consumer" (Hedden 1929). Vitiello specifically hones in on the urban
foodshed and issues of food security. In developing food security (the availability of food and
one's access to it) one must assess what food can naturally be provided, what must be brought in,
and how these products are made available. Vitiello supports the urban agroforestry movement
and states that he "promotes 'permanent agriculture' and community control of food production
by planting permaculture orchards of fruit and nut trees, berry bushes, and useful perennials in
vacant lots, school yards, community gardens, and other spaces owned by organizations"
(Vitiello 2012, 262).
Two important design initiatives affect agricultural aspects of urban forestry: vertical and
perennial growth. Vertical growth maximizes the use of space in the urban area. Trees, vines,
and espaliers all impart less of a footprint than traditional in-ground or raised-bed agriculture
(Cockrall-King 2012). Vertical growth also allows for an understory to form of species that
may not need as much light. This type of layering agricultural practice is referred to as
permaculture. Permaculture is defined as a self-sustaining system that carries out natural
patterns of production for the ultimate goal of reaching the maximum benefit for all organisms
involved (Eliades 2011). The Permaculture Research Institute has identified the components of
a typical agricultural forest:
38. A food forest typically is comprised of seven layers, the uppermost layer being the
canopy layer. The canopy layer is comprised of tall trees — typically large fruit and nut
trees. Between the tall canopy layer trees, there is a layer of low growing, typically dwarf
fruit trees. Nestled between all the small trees are the shrubs – which are well represented
by currants and berries. Filling the remaining space are the herbaceous layer, these are the
culinary and medicinal herbs, companion plants, bee-forage plants and poultry forage
plants. Any remaining space is occupied by ground cover plants. These form a living
mulch that protects the soil, reduces water loss to evaporation, and prevents weeds from
growing. We can still go a level deeper to the rhizosphere, or root zone, the underground
level which is occupied by all our root crops, such as potatoes, carrots, ginger, yacon, etc.
While that might seem like a lot of plants in one space, we still have one more to fill, the
upright vertical space. This is filled by climbers and vines, which can be run up trellises,
arbours, fences, trees or any other vertical support. This category includes grapes,
climbing beans, many berries, passionfruit, kiwi fruit, climbing peas, chokos and many
other species that love to climb. (Eliades 2011)
Perennial growth encourages sustained use of the site. A significant measure of time and
energy is exerted by landscape planners and designers into place-making and developing high
quality public spaces (Dempsey and Burton 2012). However, often times, foresight for long
term management or life cycle of the project is not fully or under-realized. The notion of a self-
sustaining (self-weeding, -watering, -nourishing) is desirable in site design as it leads to aesthetic
pleasure and promotes longevity of space.
While cities begin to proclaim landscaping projects and contributions as being positive
for the health and happiness of the community many of these efforts succumb to poorly sustained
management and maintenance practices as time passes. It is suggested that these outcomes are
not for lack of want for a place to succeed, but rather it is a lack of understanding for what a site
truly needs, deserves and can physically support (Dempsey and Burton). This line of thinking
urges the designer to focus on the design holistically, considering its entire lifecycle. Place-
keeping as opposed to place-making drives the concept of informed design. Therefore, perennial
vegetation is extremely important in the implementation of an urban edible forest. Theses
landscapes take several years of maturation to produce their desired crop and provide other
benefits like canopy and water retaining root systems. New urban forests and orchards can be
planted in a day and last decades, but the interim time spent in that space, keeping what was
made, is what makes or breaks the project's success and site compatibility. The implementation
of urban orchards or edible urban forestry requires forethought and careful planning to ensure
multi-decade success, proliferation, and appreciation for the initial efforts put forth.
39. Establishing permanent agriculture, permaculture, is essential for sustainable agricultural
practices. This permanence is best achieved with a well-designed plan allowing for both
ecological health, agircultural plenty, and site compatibility.
2.1.2 Environmental aspects
The environmental aspects of urban forestry and specifically urban agroforestry are well
researched. Several organizations and individuals have summarized potential and/or evident
environmental impacts these systems have on urban areas. Kuchelmeister and Braatz highlight
many of the positive effects of urban forestry such as improving air quality, modifying extreme
temperatures, reducing storm water run-off, reduction of the heat island effect, and the promotion
of biodiversity (Kuchelmeister and Braatz 1993).
Other research has illustrated the importance of ecological inspiration in the design
process of urban spaces (Ruff 2002). The author argues that more and more frequently open
space is being depleted, constructed structures outnumber natural ones, and that individuals have
ceased to develop "any awareness of the composition and function of the natural ecosystem"
(Ruff 2002, 175). It is mentioned that sources of food are becoming more and more ambiguous
and people no longer witness the cultivation, production, and harvesting of food, especially in
urban surroundings. He expresses that this fact has created a great disconnect between ourselves,
nature, and its nurturing properties. He goes on to explain how lack of fervor for natural systems
can be alleviated by the use of "the ecologically inspired landscape" that takes into consideration
working with complexity (ecotones, edges, layers, avoidance of monocultures and
uniformity), landscape as process (avoiding preconceptions, implementing creative
management), creativity on site (design through direct contact with the site), involvement
of users (joint discussions with users, designing as a social catalyst instead of as an
expert), minimal energy consumption (using local materials), and the use of the natural
landscape as its own playground or park (appreciating open spaces as anything you make
it to be simply by being in it) (Ruff 2002, 177)
Design and development of edible urban forests, using permaculture, can be used to
strengthen site ecology and environmental benefits. The environmental aspects and
"environmental policy should explicitly address the appearance of the landscape because people
make inferences about ecological quality from the look of the land" (Nassauer 1992, 240). This
statement supports the implementation of urban orchards and justifies informed planning and
40. advocacy for the land upon which the trees are planted. This mitigates the result of falling fruit,
blossom, and nut debris and allows for ecological health and pleasing aesthetics. This will aid in
the effort to beautify what many officials believe to be detritus to the safety and aesthetics of a
given site and reassure that this organic matter is repurposed in a useful and healthy manner
within the realm of the cycle of permaculture. This ideal lessens the misconceptions about
natural processes, degradation of organic materials on site, and the utility and vitality of natural
processes to every ecosystem (Nassauer 1992).
2.1.3 Socio-Economics aspects
Urban forests have a significant impact on social and cultural aspects of community well-
being. Such impacts include improved mental well-being (Kaplan 1995), lower crime rate
(Kuo 2001), improve attention, decrease anxiety and depression (Ulrich 2011), an increased
sense of community belonging, (Sullivan 1996) and improved feelings of safety (Thaler 2011).
Furthermore, when looking specifically at trees producing wild foods, or nontimber forest
producers (NTFPs) additional social implications arise. "Gathering spaces" become social hubs
of shared values and communal use. These "gathering sites...might be located in private or
public parks, wooded forests, yards, sidewalks, historic orchards, or planting strips on street
edges” (Poe, 2012 , p. 9).
A variety of human usages are being derived from gathering in NTFPs. A study
conducted over the course of two years of ethnographic research in Seattle, WA shows that
95% of gatherers collect plants, fruit, and mushrooms for household food uses, 55%
indicated gathering for medicinal purposes, 40% collect for craft materials, 16% for fuel
(firewood or biofuel)...As well, gatherers are motivated by many non-material purposes:
maintaining cultural practices, sharing knowledge, building community, engaging in
spiritual practices, connecting with nature, supporting stewardship, having fun and
recreating, and developing alternative food and health systems (Poe, 2012, p. 10)
Fueled by ideas of philosophical, societal, economic, and practical implementations,
author David Tracey summates his reasons to believe that growing food in the city is "the future
normative behavior of urban dwellers" (Tracey 2011, 3). Community agriculture is an avenue for
food democracy and equity within a neighborhood. Food democracy is based on the principle
that individuals have the power to determine their own food policies and practices locally,
regionally, nationally and globally. These beliefs challenge the corporate structure and allow for
41. bottom-up control of the food system. This process transforms individuals from “passive
consumers into active, educated citizens” (Hassanein 2003, 80). The goal of food democracy is
to ensure all citizens have access to affordable, healthy, and culturally appropriate foods (Lang
2007). When evaluating food equity, the idea of "the commons" and the reintroduction of that
concept into the urban fabric is a particularly compelling, especially in terms of design. This idea
focuses on the development of shared public space that mutually benefits the communities,
individuals, and the land through use of a common area of activity or productivity.
In addition to the social benefits provided by the urban agroforest, economic gains may
also be derived. The presence of trees is shown to raise property values (Donovan and Butry
2010) and increase the rate of spending in business districts (Wolf 2009). Interestingly, the
marketable yield an urban forest is able to produce has not widely been evaluated (Dobbs 2011).
In conjunction with the general ignorance of this readily available market, value of local fruit has
been camouflaged. Ladner's chapter on Economic Sustainability in The Urban Food Revolution
states that "per nutrient, consumers actually pay more for their fruit at super markets because
largely distributed fruits contain far fewer vital vitamins and minerals than higher priced,
organic, and locally grown fruits" (Ladner 2011, 97).
Socio-economic influences of edible urban forests involve the promotion of community
involvement and financial health of neighborhoods. Relevant siting of aboriculture projects has
the posibility to advance food equity among local neighborhoods, promote home-ownership,
increase owner/occupancy residence, strengthen bonds to community and shared spaces, increase
economic development, and provide social arenas.
2.1.4 Aesthetic aspects
While the implementation of urban agroforestry has appreciable and tangible benefits
pertaining to agriculture, the environment, and socioeconomics, the aesthetic appeal offers a
more subjective approach in judgment. It can be said, surely, that foliage, flower, and seasonal
color adds aesthetic pleasure to a landscape. The addition of these natural elements soften the
urban environment and allow residents to observe organic elements in a predominantly built
environment.
In The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human Design, author Anne Spirn touches
42. upon more theoretical approaches to how urban landscapes and nature work together and against
one another (Spirn 1984). She expresses that "nature is much more than simply trees in parks.
Nature resides in all living systems found in urban atmospheres, such as weeds in the sidewalks'
cracks, vacant lots overrun with native growth, underground river systems, etc." (Spirn 1984, 3).
She reiterates that even in rural landscape it is rare to find earth that hasn't felt the impact of
human touch but that "nature is also ubiquitous. Although humans strive to mold and control it,
inevitably we all fall under nature's control" (Spirn 1984, 5).
Nassauer explains the thin line between how the human eye percieves nature’s qualities,
stating
Picturesque conventions have become so integral to landscape perception that we no
longer are able to accept their origin in culture. Picturesque conventions seem so
intrinsic to nature that they are mistaken for ecological quality…The difference between
function and appearance demonstrates that applied landscape ecology is essentially a
design problem. It is not a straightforward problem of attending to scientific knowledge
of ecosystems relationships or an artistic problem of expressing ecological function, but a
public landscape problem of addressing cultural expectations that only tangentially relate
to ecological function or high art (Nassauer 1995, 161)
Here Nassauer conveys the idea that the patterns of nature should be translated into the patterns
of the culture it surrounds for successful understanding and perception, putting natural unruly
forms “inside familiar, attractive packages. It requires the designing of orderly frames for
messy ecosystems” (Nassauer 1995, 162). This power has weighty implications on the manner in
which cities are planned, designed, perceived and evaluated.
2.2 Precedent Studies
Several movements in urban arboriculture are currently seeing success through planting,
harvesting, and distributing produce yielded from their projects. The Philadelphia Orchard
Project (Philadelphia Orchard Project 2013) was founded in 2007 by economic development
pioneer Paul Glover. Their mission statement is “to plant orchards in the city of Philadelphia
that grow healthy food, green spaces and community food security” (Philadelphia Orchard
Project 2013). POP provides the plants, trees, and training to a variety of community
organizations that desire to reclaim or revitalize certain sectors of property. Community
43. organizations own, maintain, and harvest the orchards. The Philadelphia Orchard Project
advocates for community-based food production and encourages involvement and education.
Orchards are planted in formerly vacant lots, community gardens, schoolyards, and other spaces,
especially in low-wealth neighborhoods where people lack access to fresh fruit.
POP has planted 34 orchards and supports 44 and has been responsible for the planting of
around 8,000 fruit and nut trees, shrubs and vines, and other perennials. POP adheres to the
planting technique of permaculture forest gardening contained to specific urban plots in need of
remediation. Most orchards are planted with varied seasonal varieties with the intention of
extended fruit-bearing seasons so that production is heightened, an exception being orchards
planted in schoolyards that focus early spring and fall production.
Figure 2.2.1: POP project at Greenfield Elementary, planting perennial undergrowth
(Philadelphia Orchards Project 2013)
Similarly, the Beacon Food Forest of Seattle, WA focuses on permaculture forest
gardening, yet in a park-like, more sprawling and less formal design. This large-scale project
began in 2009 with series of community meetings raising awareness and gaining support and
involvement. Through these meetings concern was raised over the sheer size of this
undertaking and for the long-term design implications and maintenance. This led to the hiring
of a registered Washington Landscape Architects and a design team that would spearhead local
community discussions and work to implement a properly and efficiently informed design
approach. Eventually, University of Washington’s School of Architecture Design/Build
program was involved in the funding and development of the latest additions to the food forest.
44. The Beacon Food Forest is slated to be the largest one of its kind at 7 acres. Phase one,
completed in the Spring of 2014, comprises 2 acres and includes Community Garden plots for
families to grow their own food and an Edible Arboretum with fruits gathered from regions
around the world. The additional 5 acres will include a Berry Patch for canning, gleaning (to
gather material that is left after the main crop has been gathered) and picking, a Nut Grove with
trees providing shade and sustenance, a Gathering Plaza for celebration and education, a Kid's
Area for education and play and a Living Gateway to connect and serve as portals as users
meander through the forest.
Figure 2.2.2 Beacon Food Forest, Master Plan, 7 acres
(Beacon Food Forest 2013)
Fallen Fruit of Los Angeles, CA takes on a more cerebral and artistic approach to the
concept and design of urban arboriculture. The group is comprised of three artists dedicated to
the mapping of urban fruit trees across the city, site-specific installations of fruit producing or
fruit centric artwork, and variety of other projects that examine the social and political
relationships of fruit production in an art-forward manner. The goal differs from the
aforementioned projects in that planting and production aren’t necessarily the primary objectives.
This movement is more focused on reaping the benefits of existing plants by mapping the
locations of current fruit bearing trees in each neighborhood in the Los Angeles area. Their aim
initially began as mapping these trees to reduce the food waste and organic litter by promoting
gleaning so that ripe fruit is not left, unused, on the trees to rot and fall onto sidewalks or streets.
Gradually more branches of the project unfurled such as Urban Fruit Action, an initiative to
45. promote citizens to plant fruit trees on their personal property and Fruit Tree Adoptions which
encourages “the planting of these trees in either public space or on the periphery of private
property, in order to create new kinds of communal life based on generosity and sharing…Each
recipient signs an adoption form promising to care for the tree — initiating a relationship with it”
(Fallen Fruit 2013).
Figure 2.2.3 Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Tree map
(Fallen Fruit 2013)
One year after this initial research was completed, Tree Pittsburgh, a city-wide tree
advocacy group, received a grant on July 20th
, 2014 from the national non- profit Alliance for
Community Trees (ACTrees) to plant 8 fruit trees in a vacant lot near the current urban farm-
Frazier Farms. The funding was a part of ACTrees’ program Community Grovessm
founded in
2013 whose goals are to help to fund “local, grassroots organizations to plant, maintain, and
harvest fruit and nut trees. Healthy trees make healthy communities. Planting Community
Grovessm
of fruit and nut trees will provide fresh food for communities, educate residents about
nutrition and agriculture, bring neighbors together, and revitalize vacant or derelict urban lands”
(Alliance for Community Trees, 2014). Grants were awarded to 12 mid-sized cities across the
country and were largely presented to small organizations within cities that showed a desire
46. within the community to implement small orchards. Tree Pittsburgh was granted the funds at a
city level from ACTrees and they were then passed from the city level to the neighborhood level,
to the hands of The Oakland Green Team. The Oakland Green Team is a “pedestrian and
bicycling committee dedicated to improving trail connections and creating attractive open
spaces” (OPDC 2014). The trees were planted on November 1st
, 2014 following an early autumn
community education seminar on the proper siting, care, maintenance and harvesting of the trees.
A follow up community meeting is to occur in early spring concerning their continued treatment.
Careful research of this ongoing process will be integral in the furthering of this already, locally
active, movement.
Figures 2.2.4, 2.2.5., 2.2.6. Active Urban Forestry Group Logos 2014
47. 3.1 Design Manifesto
As set forth by the literature, trees in the urban setting have historically been integrated
into urban settings and removed from urban settings for very different reasons than I feel they are
currently. The literature suggests that in the past trees have been planted almost exclusively for
their perceived aesthetic or spiritual virtues or removed due to their unfortunate occupation of
prime development opportunities. Literature concerning the incorporation of fruit and nut trees
in urban design has also raised concerns pertaining to blossom and fruit litter and the debris’
effect on the surroundings. With these past practices in mind, in the community of South
Oakland I feel that we must look to the future trees in the urban environmnt and start to approach
them differently than they have been, concerning their placement, care and value to the
neighborhood. The planting of fruit and nut trees should be holistically approached not just for
aesthetic appeal, as in the past, but for socio-economic stability, ecological benefits, and
agricultural bounty. Fears of debris should be solved not by abstaining from planting fruiting
and flowering species, but to instead employ them for their benefits by implementing thoughtful
site design and maintenance parameters insuring their permanence and ability to thrive.
I would also argue with the statement issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture citing
“lack of interest” as a threat to urban forest ecosystems(U.S. Department of Agriculture 2012).
As set forth by the community developed master plan Oakland 2025, park and trail connections,
housing and open space strategies, community vibrancy, and home-ownership are all of
paramount importance. Interest has been clearly exhibited by the research and suggested
actions documented in the Master Plan. An urban agroforestry system designed and integrated
within the context of South Oakland makes logical sense and its benefits are aligned with current
assets and future desires. Public and Private funding is available and has already been attained
on a small level from the national non-profit Alliance for Community Trees, who funded Tree
Pittsburgh and The Oakland Green Team for their current South Oakland project.
As per the precedent studies and for the purposes of Landscape Architecture research, the
Fallen Fruit art installations and guerilla gleaning approaches appear to be the least appropriately
aligned avenues of research. Their many other practices, especially the documentation and
mapping of tree locations and the Urban Fruit Action project promote ideals more aptly relevant
48. to the project in South Oakland. These concepts are less ‘design-on-the-land’ oriented, but
offer excellent ancillary benefits, cultural tie-ins, and user appeal. I plan to use an integrated
system, similar to the Philadelphia Orchard Project’s amalgamation of permaculture practices
and urban infill projects combined with, the large scale nature of the Beacon Food Forest.I
believe this is the most site appropriate design approach for this project.
These three examples of urban arboriculture emphasize varying avenues of pursuing
edible urban landscape projects. The Philadelphia Orchard Project focuses on the values of
permaculture planting and community outreach but does so on a smaller scale using vacant or
underutilized public properties and local volunteers to plants and maintain projects. POP is
successful at planting many small-scale urban orchards and reaches out to many different types
of communities i.e. schools, churches, and impoverished neighborhoods. The Beacon Food
Forest, however, is a large tract of land focusing on a grand-scale permaculture ecosystem. The
Beacon Food Forest retains the value held by POP, via education and community involvement,
yet it does so in a singular multi-zoned forest as opposed to many lots. Fallen Fruits is a hybrid
of the two and reaches out in both the small and grand scale. They are involved with vacant plot
orchards, other small-scale public plantings, and art installations, yet also create and promote the
realization of the existing, larger urban forest by mapping out where fruit trees are in
communities and town zones. Education, community outreach, and ecological sustainability
continue to be consistent attributes for all three examples of scale and style.
3.2 Design Position & Philosophy
The use of arboriculture design in the urban atmosphere is a way of reconvening the
natural with the cultural in places where barriers exist between the two. Successful connections
are reached by way of creating visually pleasing, orderly, and functional arrangements for nature
that satisfy the cultural demand for attractive and structured environments. Specific compelling
readings that support my design philosophy come from Ruff, Nassauer, Vitiello, Tracey, and
ultimately Dempsey and Burton. Ruff and Nassauer highlight the importance of holistic
ecological design and the ecological and aesthetic importance of urban forest ecosystems.
Naussauer even goes on to suggest the wildly intriguing concept that environmental policy
should explicitly address the physical appearance of the landscape because users make inferences
49. about a location’s ecological quality based simply upon the look of the land. Where Ruff and
Nassauer focus on the environmental and ecological aspects Vitiello, Tracey, Dempsey and
Burton socio-cultural aspects and land use planning. Vitiello touches upon the importance of
community controlled food production and involvement, the use of permaculture standards from
an ecological standpoint and from a cultural sense of permanence through the implementation of
futuristic goals, as well as rehabilitative connectivity through green urban infill projects.
Tracey submits that urban agroforestry and other forms of urban agriculture will be the “future
normative behavior of urban dwellers” (Tracey 2011, 3) and I believe that if this continues to
grow as popular consensus we will all benefit greatly from the generation of customizable
systems to retrofit more and more urban communities to increase their access to and
implementation of urban agricultural systems.
Dempsey and Burton, however, are the primary researchers who initially drew me
into the idea of place keeping, permanence, and long term green/ open space management
policies. While cities begin to proclaim landscaping projects and contributions as being
positive for the health and happiness of the community many of these efforts succumb to poorly
sustained management and maintenance practices as time passes. It is suggested that these
outcomes are not for lack of want for a place to succeed, but rather it is a lack of understanding
for what a site truly needs, deserves and can physically support (Dempsey and Burton). This line
of thinking urges the designer to focus on the design holistically, considering its entire lifecycle.
Place-keeping as opposed to place-making drives the concept of informed design. Therefore,
perennial vegetation is extremely important in the implementation of an urban edible forest.
Theses landscapes take several years of maturation to produce their desired crop and provide
other benefits like canopy and water retaining root systems. New urban forests and orchards can
be planted in a day and last decades, but the interim time spent in that space, keeping what was
made, is what makes or breaks the project's success and site compatibility. The implementation
of urban orchards or edible urban forestry requires forethought and careful planning to ensure
multi-decade success, proliferation, and appreciation for the initial efforts put forth.
Establishing permanent agriculture, permaculture, is essential for sustainable agricultural
practices. This permanence is best achieved with a well-designed plan allowing for both
ecological health, agricultural plenty, and site compatibility.
50. These three examples of urban arboriculture emphasize varying avenues of
pursuing edible urban landscape projects. The Philadelphia Orchard Project focuses on the
values of permaculture planting and community outreach but does so on a smaller scale using
vacant or underutilized public properties and local volunteers to plants and maintain projects.
POP is successful at planting many small-scale urban orchards and reaches out to many different
types of communities i.e. schools, churches, and impoverished neighborhoods. The Beacon
Food Forest, however, is a large tract of land focusing on a grand-scale permaculture ecosystem.
The Beacon Food Forest retains the value held by POP, via education and community
involvement, yet it does so in a singular multi-zoned forest as opposed to many lots. Fallen
Fruits is a hybrid of the two and reaches out in both the small and grand scale. They are involved
with vacant plot orchards, other small-scale public plantings, and art installations, yet also create
and promote the realization of the existing, larger urban forest by mapping out where fruit trees
are in communities and town zones. Education, community outreach, and ecological
sustainability continue to be consistent attributes for all three examples of scale and style.
4.1 Proposed Design Approach
This project aims at developing an edible urban forest system within the Pittsburgh
neighborhood of South Oakland based on current urban arboriculture practices and theories.
The development of this system will focus on the design standards as well as agriculture
processes. Considering the impact of the agricultural systems on the local urban ecology,
community, and aesthetics the design will synchronize the site’s parameters with the site’s
necessities.
This project proposes to employ the standard design phases including; inventory,
analysis, program development, and design development. In addition, the design process will be
informed by several site requirements regarding soil characteristics, solar and irrigation
accessibility, security, maintenance, and sustainability over time. Soil tests and possible
remediation are crucial to the success of any agricultural project and are paramount in the initial
stages of design. Along with suitable soil, the site might be ensured adequate solar access and
well as proximity to a source of irrigation. As basic criteria are met, soil, sun, and water, site
51. conditions regarding safety and proliferation are implemented. Security of the crop is crucial if
harvesting has the condition of ownership or participation. However, if the produce is
purposefully community accessible and theft is not a concern the issue of safety is focused on the
maintenance of ecological debris that has the potential to be dangerous, such as overburdened
limbs or slippery fallen fruit or leaves. Potentially, the most important element of this proposed
design is the site’s capacity for sustainability over time. Using the design and ecological
methods of permaculture aids in ensuring the agricultural success of the site, however, planning
for growth and proper maintenance are integral aspects of designing an edible urban landscape.
The plants and trees must be granted a healthy amount of distance to promote proper growth over
time, while not seeming barren in the initial years. Progression of planting design and
programmatic elements must be implemented in stages so as not to derail interest or impede
aesthetics in the development years.
During the proposed design process, the inventory and analysis phases will examine the
site’s potential to promote and invigorate social and economic growth and expansion. The site’s
agricultural stability will also be studied which will help evaluate the health and survival of the
site over time, growing cycles, and limitations of site systems. Then analysis maps and diagrams
will be developed at the contextual scales and site scales for each of these systems. At this stage
soil, sun, and water strategies are decided. Systematic mapping of the agricultural system is
created in coalition with the existing urban fabric with ecology and the user in mind. Also, at this
stage the community will become more involved with expressing specific wants and needs through
surveys, meetings, and design charettes. Possibilities for solutions to any necessary additions,
and community desires will then be evaluated in relation to the site’s context.
Proposals for the design will be derived from decisions based upon apprised existing
elements and resources. Proposals will also be informed by the successful design characteristics
from precedent studies. The goal of this design is to create an edible urban arboriculture system
that promotes sustainability over time while remain ecologically, socially, and aesthetically
relevant within the urban fabric.
52. 4.2 Site Context and History
Pittsburgh was born through industry and manufacturing, but has transformed into an
adaptive and diverse city. The city now offers a variety of opportunities and successes via
health and research industries, banking, finance, and technology markets, education, scientific,
and engineering frontiers, as well as many social, recreational, and cultural engagements. Like
many modern cities, Pittsburgh is experiencing an era of regrowth. A decline in both population
and use of urban heavy industrial sites created vacant pockets of unused commercial, residential,
and industrial acreage that now face a new life as the city undergoes revitalization. Housing,
retail, and commercial prospects are breaking out across the city as well and several green and
open space initiatives.
Green Up Pittsburgh, founded in 2008, with the help of hundreds of volunteers,
transformed more than 120 vacant lots into stable, functioning green spaces. These greens paces
serve as community and memorial gardens, urban farms, tree parks, gateway greening and
passive greenspace. Grow Pittsburgh is a local initiative founded in 2005 dedicated to
promoting community involvement and championing neighborhood stewardship of vacant lots
through the cultivation of urban agriculture. Grow Pittsburgh is also involved in the education
of agricultural techniques and is highly active with local retailers and restaurants. These active
movements establish precedence, implicate interest and feasibility, and demonstrate current
community involvement.
Two established movements involved with the urban forestry movement are Tree
Pittsburgh, affiliated with Grow Pittsburgh and Treevitalize, a project supported by the
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Both initiatives are dedicated to
responding to an alarming trend of the loss of trees in Pennsylvania’s metropolitan areas and are
public-private partnerships to help restore tree cover, educate citizens about planting trees as an
act of caring for our environment, and build capacity among local governments to understand,
protect and restore their urban trees. There is a pronounced interest in this movement to protect
and restore Pittsburgh’s urban forest along with several agricultural programs. The
combination of the two concepts working as one will be the next logical progression for the city.
53. 4.3 Data and Resources
Geographic, topographic, and climatic information, general soil types, and city mapping
programs are among the current accessible resources for data collection and can be accessed
through GIS mapping. Specific solar and soil studies will be necessary at the site level to
assure proper agricultural compatibility. Arborists will be an additional resource for specific
consultation on successful native fruit trees and BMPs for urban tree growth. Involvement with
the community will be a very important process in data collection as the project aims to bring the
community together and benefit them directly. Discussions of residents’ wants and needs,
surveys, and collective creative thoughts and ideas are all crucial to the design process and
success of the project as a whole.
5.1 Proposed Timeline
The inventory phase will encompass gathering and categorizing data and information on
natural and human features in the proposed areas. Inventory of natural and cultural existing site
conditions, and existing site features and infrastructure will be collected. Ecological health is
paramount to this design and site development will cause the existing site and its natural systems
to change. Identifying and understanding current functional natural systems will allow for
compatible integration of new site functions and avoid creating new conflicts in the future. An
urban neighborhood in the Northeast post-industrial rustbelt will require the gathering of
information of several features. Examples of such data include: existing natural conditions such
as geologic substrate, soil conditions, topography, hydrology, vegetation, and microclimate. The
collection of this data will inform grading and foundation requirements, locate poor-draining
soils, identify fertile or infertile soils or soils prone to erosion, identify areas that are too steep for
development, locate parts of the site suitable for development, find shallow grades that will not
drain properly or require excessive (and expensive) drainage remediation, determine which
watershed the site belongs to, determine if groundwater or public access water quality is
inadequate for human or landscape use, establish the basic plant community found on the site,
54. and identify which species are present on the site prior to development. Existing site features
such as structures, circulation systems and views will be evaluated, followed by examination of
cultural conditions and existing infrastructure. Crucial information for this site includes access
to water sources for irrigation, local vandalism or crime patterns, and community values.
Analysis of the site’s inventory will inform exactly what natural, structural, and cultural
features are currently present and those of which that require further design and engineering.
The analysis phase will also determine ways in which to enhance existing site features with
community and ecological health in mind. Design of the edible urban forest requires close
community involvement; therefore residents’ values and desires must be equally analyzed and
weighed with the same depth and thought as physical attributes or necessities.
Conceptual development of the design will involve close interaction between the results
of site analysis and community input. Assuring circulation through and around the site to
promote pedestrian infiltration and involvement is second in importance only to the assignment
and placement of the fruit trees themselves. Developing an effective and healthy planting plan
and schedule will help to ensure ecological health, aesthetic pleasure, and retain community
interest. Programmatic elements such as seating, educational signage, and gathering areas will
be established as initial site requirements; however, community input and site specifications will
have a significant impact on additional design details. Continual presentation to the
community, for approval and input, will help to most accurately reflect democratic design
specifications of the space. Additional design phases would include consultations and planning
with an arborist with a specialty in the proper planting and maintenance of fruit trees and with a
horticulturist to design the layers of undergrowth for accurate development of healthy
permaculture ecology.
The inventory and analysis phases will be completed in the first weeks of the Capstone
semester, Spring of 2015. In addition, at this time specialists will be lined up and the
conceptual design process can begin. Upon completion of the inventory, the community will be
involved and presented with the site’s parameters, at which point their wants, needs, and values
will be weighed during the analysis and conceptual design process. Community research is
paramount at this point and personal involvement, via meetings and surveys is to be conducted.
This design process will continue to aid in forming a meaningful bond between the design and
the community it becomes a part of.
55. Having researched both the increasing interest and potential concerns of implementing
urban arboriculture systems, I seek to address the successful design, planning and placement of
urban food systems, using methods that have been singularly successful as parts of an entire
urban ecological system. I then plan to develop systems to achieve a successful food harvest
while simultaneously attaining and sustaining a sense of place. Therefore, this applied research
proposes to examine varying urban arboriculture strategies in an effort to design a system to be
integrated into the community of South Oakland. I will apply successful elements of previously
implemented systems and will strive to uphold current neighborhood values while also working
to create a sense of permanence, connectivity, and ecological health.
56. Bibliography
Allen, Will, and Charles Wilson. The Good Food Revolution: Growing Healthy Food, People,
and Communities. New York, NY: Gotham Books, 2012.
Barker, Phillip A. "Fruit Litter from Urban Trees." Journal of Arborculture 12, no. 12
(December 1986).
"Beacon Food Forest: A Community Permaculture Project." Beacon Food Forest: A Community
Permaculture Project. Accessed October 6, 2013. http://www.beaconfoodforest.org/.
Benefits of Trees and Urban Forests. PDF. Washington D.C.: Alliance for Community Trees,
August 2011.
Brown, Patricia L. "Tasty, and Subversive, Too." Nytimes.com. May 11, 2013.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/us/fruit-activists-take-urban-gardens-in-a-new-
direction.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1381999841-fciUoxS9MtKPb1JP0iv5Eg.
Carpenter, Novella, and Willow Rosenthal. The Essential Urban Farmer. New York, NY:
Penguin Books, 2011.
Clark, Kyle H., and Kimberly A. Nicholas. "Introducing Urban Food Forestry: A Multifunctional
Approach to Increase Food Security and Provide Ecosystem Services." Landscape
Ecology 28, no. 6 (July 2013). DOI: http://urbanfoodforestry.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/08/Introducing_urban_food_forestry.pdf.
Cockrall-King, Jennifer. Food and the City: Urban Agriculture and the New Food Revolution.
Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2012.
Davis, Ren, and Helen Davis. Our Mark on This Land: A Guide to the Legacy of the Civilian
Conservation Corps in America's Parks. Granville, OH: McDonald & Woodward Pub.
2011.
Dempsey, Nicola, and Mel Burton. "Defining Place-keeping: The Long-term Management of
Public Spaces." Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11, no. 1 (2012): 11-20.
57. Eliades, Angelo. "Why Food Forests." The Permaculture Research Institute. October 21, 2011.
Accessed October 16, 2013. permaculture.org.au/2011/10/21/why-food-forests.
"Fallen Fruit." Fallen Fruit. Accessed October 12, 2013. http://fallenfruit.org/.
Grey, Gene W., and Frederick J. Deneke. Urban Forestry. Malabar, FL: Krieger Pub. 1992.
Gustafson, Katherine. Change Comes to Dinner: How Vertical Farmers, Urban Growers, and
Other Innovators Are Revolutionizing How America Eats. New York: St. Martin's
Griffin, 2012.
Harris, Richard Wilson. Arboriculture: Care of Trees, Shrubs, and Vines in the Landscape.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1983. 2-3.
Hassanein, Neva. "Practicing Food Democracy: A Pragmatic Politics of Transformation."
Journal of Rural Studies 19, no. 1 (2003): 77-86. DOI: 10.1016/S0743-0167 (02) 00041-
4.
Johnson, Lorraine. City Farmer. Vancouver: Greystone Books, 2010.
Ladner, Peter. The Urban Food Revolution: Changing the Way We Feed Cities. Gabriola Island,
BC: New Society Publishers, 2011.
Lang, Tim. "Food Industrialisation and Food Power: Implications for Food Governance."
Development Policy Review 21, no. 5-6 (2003): 555-68. Doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
8659.2003.00223.x.
McClain, Rebecca, Melissa Poe, Patrick T. Hurley, Joyce Lecompte-Mastenbrook, and Marla R.
Emery. "Producing Edible Landscapes in Seattle's Urban Forests." Urban Forestry &
Urban Gardening 11, no. 2 (2012): 187-94.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1618866711001002.
Merrill, Perry Henry. Roosevelt's Forest Army. Montpelier: Perry H. Merrill, 1981.
Nassauer, Joan I. "Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames." Landscape Journal 14, no. 2 (1995):
161-70.
Nassauer, Joan Iverson. "The Appearance of Ecological Systems as a Matter of Policy."
Landscape Ecology 6, no. 4 (March 1992): 239-50. DOI: 10.1007/BF00129702.
Nordahl, Darrin. Public Produce: The New Urban Agriculture. Washington, DC: Island Press,
2009.
58. "Philadelphia Orchard Project." Philadelphia Orchard Project. Accessed October 11, 2013.
http://www.phillyorchards.org/.
Poe, Melissa, Rebecca McClain, Patrick Hurley, and Marla Emery. "Urban Forest Justice and the
Rights to Wild Foods, Medicines, and Materials in the City." Human Ecology 40, no. 6
(December 2012). Doi: http://urbanfoodforestry.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Poe-
Urban_Forest_Justice.pdf.
Ruff, Alan. "An Ecological Approach." In Theory in Landscape Architecture: A Reader. Edited
by Simon R. Swaffield, 175-177. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.
Shepard, Mark. Restoration Agriculture: Real-world Permaculture for Farmers. Austin, TX:
Acres U.S.A., 2013.
Spirn, Anne Whiston. The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human Design. New York: Basic
Books, 1984.
Swaffield, Simon R. "Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames." In Theory in Landscape
Architecture: A Reader, 196-206. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.
Tracey, David. Urban Agriculture: Ideas and Designs for the New Food Revolution. Gabriola,
B.C.: New Society Publishers, 2011.
"Urban Forests in the 21st Century." American Forests. Accessed October 12, 2013.
http://www.americanforests.org/our-programs/urbanforests/history/21st-century/.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. U.S. Forest Service. U.S. Forest Facts and Historical Trends.
Accessed October 22, 16. http://fia.fs.fed.us/library/briefings-summaries-
overviews/docs/ForestFactsMetric.pdf.
Vitiello, Dominec. "Planning the Food Secure City." In Nature's Entrepфt: Philadelphia's
Urban Sphere and Its Environmental Thresholds, 250-266. Pittsburgh, PA: University of
Pittsburgh Press, 2012.
Vorhees, Ralph W. "Urban Agriculture in New Brunswick."
http://policy.rutgers.edu/academics/projects/studios/food11report.pdf.
Watson, Tom. "Gleaning Urban Fruit Turns Food Waste Green." The Seattle Times, September
7, 2012.
