sign in sign up
<<
Home , Landscape architecture

THE FRUITS OF : THE POWER OF LANDSCAPE IN PRESENTING SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION

by

WILLIAM T. MANN

A REPORT

submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

MASTER OF LANDSCAPE

Department of Landscape Architecture/Regional & Community Planning College of Architecture, Planning, and

KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas

2013

Approved by:

Major Professor Laurence A. Clement Jr.

Abstract

Our current agricultural system in the U.S. involves procedures that appear to maintain high levels of productivity. However, the long-term outlook regarding this system indicates an overall degradation of the ecological resources that generate the abundance of agricultural products to which we are accustomed (Lyle, 1994). This project applies sustainable food production strategies specifically addressed in as a regenerative alternative to industrial to a site on the Kansas State University campus. This research initiative quantifies the productive benefits of in providing for the Derby Dining Hall, and illustrates how sustainable food production strategies can be shaped through landscape form and in ways that connect people with ecologically sound food production. The literature review addressed landscape architecture theory and sustainable agriculture. In addition, a set of interviews as well as three precedent studies helped to focus project considerations and to inform design decision-making. The site design process comprised the primary method for exploration and subsequent development of conclusions. The first two design iterations were performed with a specific focus on productivity and then garden form, with the third acting as a synthesis of the first two. The final suggests that there is a potential for a positive didactic experience of sustainable food production through the artful synthesis of landscape form, particularly with regard to carefully arranged circulation patterns. In addition it was found that, given the average growing season rainfall of 3 inches per month, the water harvested from the roofs of Moore and West residence halls can support over 7,300 square feet of intensive produce beds with a 1 inch per week application rate. In regard to food production, select non-bulk items on Derby Dining Hall’s menu (e.g. Parsley, Garlic, Basil, Kale, Radishes, Turnips, & Oregano) can be provided for or supplemented entirely, given the designed array of produce in the proposed . It would appear that incorporating permaculture and organic farming strategies into the campus fabric would facilitate K-State Housing and Dining’s efforts to promote healthy food -- and sustainable thinking -- by increasing the variety, freshness and interest of its menu.

The Fruits of Landscape the power of landscape in presenting sustainable food production Abstract

Our current agricultural system in the The fi nal plan suggests that there is a The Fruits of Landscape: U.S. involves procedures that appear potential for a positive didactic experi- the power of landscape in presenting to maintain high levels of productivity. ence of sustainable food production sustainable food production However, the long-term outlook re- through the artful synthesis of land- by garding this system indicates an overall scape form, particularly with regard to degradation of the ecological resources carefully arranged circulation patterns. William Mann that generate the abundance of agricul- In addition it was found that, given the tural products to which we are accus- average growing season rainfall of 3 tomed (Lyle, 1994). This project applies inches per month, the water harvested sustainable food production strategies from the roofs of Moore and West A report submitted in partial fulfi llment specifi cally addressed in permaculture residence halls can support over 7,300 of the requirements for the degree: as a regenerative alternative to indus- square feet of intensive produce beds Master of Landscape Architecture from trial agriculture to a site on the Kansas with a 1 inch per week application rate. the Department of Landscape Architec- State University campus. This research In regard to food production, select ture/Regional and Community Planning: initiative quantifi es the productive non-bulk items on Derby Dining Hall’s College of Architecture, Planning and benefi ts of sustainable agriculture in menu (e.g. Parsley, Garlic, Basil, Kale, Design providing for the Derby Dining Hall, Radishes, Turnips, & Oregano) can be and illustrates how sustainable food provided for or supplemented entirely, KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY production strategies can be shaped given the designed array of produce in through landscape form and space in the proposed gardens. It would appear Manhattan, Kansas 2013 ways that connect people with ecologi- that incorporating permaculture and cally sound food production. organic farming strategies into the campus fabric would facilitate K-State Approved by Major Professor: The literature review addressed Housing and Dining’s eff orts to pro- landscape architecture theory and mote healthy food -- and sustainable Laurence A. Clement, Jr. sustainable agriculture. In addition, thinking -- by increasing the variety, a set of interviews as well as three freshness and interest of its menu. precedent studies helped to focus project considerations and to inform design decision-making. The site design process comprised the primary method for exploration and subsequent devel- opment of conclusions. The fi rst two design iterations were performed with a specifi c focus on garden productivity and then garden form, with the third acting as a synthesis of the fi rst two.

The Fruits of Landscape ii Table of Contents List of Figures

List of Figures iv 7 - Conclusion 77 1 - Introduction Figure 4.12|Trash Compactor Figure 6.13| Apple Guild Scheme List of Tables v Figure 1.1|Project Methodology... Figure 4.13|Recycle Bins Figure 6.14|Spiral Bed Landscape Infl uence 78 Figure 1.2|Project Dilemma and... Figure 4.14|Existing Conditions Sum... Figure 6.15|Section A-A’ - Upper Bed... Acknowledgements vi Site Water Management 78 Figure 4.15|Existing Site Character Figure 6.16|Bed Row Detail Section... 1 - Introduction 1 Food Production 80 2 - Background Dilemma 2 Figure 4.16|2012 K-State Master Plan Figure 6.17|Section D-D’ Wetland & S... Further Study 80 Figure 2.1|Literature Map Research Question 4 Figure 4.17|Housing & Dining Master... Figure 6.18|Utility Relocations Summary 81 Figure 2.2|Linear versus Regen... Project Overview 4 Figure 4.18|International... Plantings Figure 6.19|Campus Creek Existing Co... Figure 2.3|Intermediate Wheatgrass Bibliography 82 Figure 4.19|International...Garden 2 - Background 7 Figure 2.4|Development of Perennial... 7 - Conclusion Agriculture 8 Glossary 86 Figure 2.5|Perennial Sunfl owers 5 - Design Process Figure 7.1|Project Summary Diagram Landscape Infl uence 13 Appendix A 88 Figure 2.6|Frontal Approach Figure 5.1|Design Process Diagram Master LIst 88 Summary 17 Figure 2.7|Entrance Figure 5.2|Iteration 1: Section A-A’... Figure 2.8|Path-Space Relationships Figure 5.3|Iteration 1: Section B-B’... Appendix B 96 3 - Precedents & Interviews 19 Figure 5.4|Iteration 1 - Sustainable... Human Subjects Waiver Form 96 Precedent Projects 20 3 - Case Studies & Interviews Figure 5.5|Site Food Production Interview Materials 98 Figure 3.1|Franklin Permaculture Gar... Interviews 22 Figure 5.6|Iteration 1 Design Elements Figure 3.2|Franklin... Garden Aerial Appendix C 106 Figure 5.7|Iteration 2: Section A-A’... 4 - Site Selection & Analysis 27 Figure 3.3|Franklin... Plantings Site Suitability Analysis 106 Figure 5.8|Iteration 2: Section B-B’ Figure 3.4|IC Permaculture Site Site Suitability Analysis 28 Figure 5.9|Iteration 2: Landscape In... Figure 3.5|IC Permaculture... Plantings Existing Conditions 30 Figure 5.10|Basic Elements of Landsc... Figure 3.6|Middlebury Organic Farm... Opportunities 36 Figure 5.11|Preliminary Design Synth... Figure 3.7|Middlebury Constraints 38 Figure 5.12|Revision of Preliminary D... Figure 3.8|Grant Kitchen Garden... Summary 39 Figure 5.13|Design Process Flow Figure 3.9|Grant Park Kitchen Garden... 5 - Design Process 41 6 - Results 4 - Site Selection & Analysis Iteration 1 - Food Production 42 Figure 6.1|Link from Iterations to Fin... Figure 4.1|Site Suitability Factors Iteration 2 - Landscape Infl uence 47 Figure 6.2|Final Design Figure 4.2|Suitability Analysis Results Synthesis and Revision Process 51 Figure 6.3|Entry Figure 4.3|Site Location Figure 6.4|Axial Approach and Learn... 6 - Results 55 Figure 4.4|Existing Mature Trees Figure 6.5|Tangential Views through... Design Structure 56 Figure 4.5|Existing Invasive Honey... Figure 6.6|Perceiving Intentional Eco... Landscape Infl uence 58 Figure 4.6|Existing Trees Figure 6.7|Stage & Entrance Structure Materials & Technologies 62 Figure 4.7|Low Quality Trees Figure 6.8|Water Tower Detail Site Prep & Maintenance 62 Figure 4.8|Existing Hydrants Figure 6.9|Water Tower Locations Food Production 66 Figure 4.9|Existing Parking Lot Figure 6.10|Sheet Mulching Restorative Wetland 74 Figure 4.10|Sewer Manhole Figure 6.11|Juxtaposition & Recomb... Summary 74 Figure 4.11|Outlet Below Derby Plaza Figure 6.12|Productive Central Learn...

iii The Fruits of Landscape iv List of Tables Acknowledgements

4 - Suitability Analysis I would like to express my sincere grati- tude to the many people who contrib- Table 4.1|Site Suitability Analysis uted to the completion of this project. 6 - Results I want to thank Lorn Clement (major professor) for the time spent provid- Table 6.1|Cistern Capacity Calculations ing guidance for the project. Thanks to Table 6.2|Plant Production List Lee Skabelund (secondary professor) Table 6.3|Derby Menu Requirement... and Rhonda Janke (tertiary professor) for the time and eff ort they spent in delivering thoughtful feedback and helpful insight and direction over the course of this project. I would also like to thank Hilary Noonan, Mark Edwards, and Mark Taussig for their willingness to participate in interviews and for their helpful responses. I want to extend my sincere appreciation to family and friends for their moral support and en- couragement throughout this project. In particular I would like to say thank you to my wonderful fi ance, Lindsay York for her support. Lastly I would like to thank God for giving me mental and spiritual strength in overcoming obstacles.

v The Fruits of Landscape vi Introduction1

vii he is a land of plen- tals of our agricultural system make Literature Review ty due partly to the power and sense in light of natural . The Tsuccess of modern industrial agri- movement toward organic and sustain- Interviews . The current agricultural system able agriculture has produced a much has been perfected in the realm of food deeper understanding of the environ- Agriculture production by streamlining processes, mental impact of food production. Eco- Mark Taussig refi ning genetics, consolidating produc- logical design and permaculture take Perception of Sustainable Influence of Art tion centers, and capitalizing on rela- these sustainable and organic practices andscape L In f K-State Campus History lu Circulation, Focus, Repeti- tively cheep natural resources. Given and tie them together in a whole- e n tion, Hierarchy, Views the rapid rate and focus of agricultural systems approach to the way we grow c e technology development, the assump- our food and sustain our livelihood. In Formal and Spatial Arrangment Iteration 2 Cues to Regenerative tion of our current agricultural system this approach, the ecological resources Landscape seems to be that no fundamental fl aws on which agriculture has depended for in the of the system have thousands of years are beginning to be been made throughout the many years identifi ed, understood, and managed in of agricultural evolution. The process of a sustainable and regenerative way. developing technologies in the realm of ble Fo Permaculture Strategies ina od sta Pr agriculture today has been eff ective in u od S u c making the traditional way things have t io n been done in agriculture more effi cient. Dilemma Organic Agriculture For example, the plow was developed The movements in our culture towards and used over four thousand years ago sustainable agriculture, organic farm- Iteration 1 (Jones 2012). Since then, this simple ing, local produce, community and tool has been continually improved and home are gaining momen- Iteration 3 Regenerative Systems made more effi cient. Presently it is a tum. In 2008 the United States Depart- massive hydraulically powered contrap- ment of Agriculture (USDA) reported tion, cultivating swaths over sixty feet nearly 13,000 certifi ed organic farming Final Design Plan across (Case iH 2013). Improvements to operations and over 4,500 farmer’s Interviews chemical fertilizers, , herbi- markets in the country (USDA 2010; cides and annual genetics are con- USDA 2012). More people want fresh, stantly being made in an eff ort to get chemical free, and responsibly pro- Hilary Noonan Results/Conclusions as much benefi t out of strategies that duced food. However, this cultural shift Mark Edwards presently seem to be working. Thus, for still faces a few obstacles. Ecological thousands of years the assumption has Case Studies Potential for promotion of sustainable food and environmentally production through sythesis of artful synthesis been that it is necessary to cultivate the projects are frequently misunderstood of basic arrangements of form and space. soil and that chemical applications are or negatively viewed because of the Site water and food harvest potential a requirement for competitive produc- way they exhibit “un-manicured” or Ithica College Permaculture tion. But, are these strategies funda- seemingly under-maintained land- UMASS Amherst Permaculture mentally necessary to achieve that Produce Items compared with Derby Dining scapes (Nassauer 1995). Middlebury Organic Farm Hall’s Menu Needs competitive of production? The danger is that the perception or An increasing number of people in fi rst-impressions people have of certain Figure 1.1|Project Methodology Diagram agriculture today are going back to the landscapes they encounter aff ects their The project methodology includes literature review, design process & results, where design is the central basics and making sure the fundamen- understanding and acceptance of the method for exploring the project research question (diagram by author).

2 Chapter 2| Introduction The Fruits of Landscape 3 ecological functions of those land- This project used the site design pro- The claim of this project is that land- scapes, especially when they are close cess as the primary method for inte- scape architecture can be used as a Dilemma to home and integrated into one’s grating sustainable food production tool in presenting the sustainable and every-day life. with infl uential arrangements of form regenerative approach to food produc- The long-term outlook on the current and space in landscape architecture. tion causing the viewer to acknowl- agricultural system in the U.S. projects an This dilemma surfaces in the university overall degradation of the ecological Preliminary concepts sketches were edge, comprehend, and accept such resources from which we derive the abun- environment as well. There seems to formulated in two design iterations. strategies. Through designed land- dance of agricultural products to which we be a struggle between the traditional, Through the process of laying out the scape, connections between people are accustomed (Lyle, 1994). Sustainable pristine landscapes and landscapes that site with diff erent sets of goals cor- and their dependence on ecological methods and strategies for agriculture are exhibit cutting edge ecological tech- present and developing slowly. Yet, they responding to each iteration, concepts resources can be made. As people are still represent the minority in U.S. food nologies and in centers for for both sustainable food production connected with ecology, greater stew- production. higher education. University campuses and landscape infl uence were cre- ardship of the land is bound to result. are landscapes in which students, fac- ated for the site. The fi nal phase in ulty and staff spend large amounts of this design process was a synthesis of their “every-day lives.” Thus, a campus these two iterations, combining the provides an opportunity for infl uence strengths of both concepts in the fi nal toward sustainable landscape func- site design. tion through the careful combination of established landscape architectural Question strategies and ecological and regenera- Project Overview tive design. Given the persistence of modern industrial This report proceeds with a review of agricultural traditions and the imperative the project literature, discussions of to incorporate sustainable practices into the case studies and interviews, site agriculture, how can design strategies be Research Question employed on the Kansas State University Given the persistence of modern analysis, design process, results and campus to make apparent and under- industrial agricultural traditions and conclusions. The results show lessons standable an alternative approach that is the imperative to incorporate sustain- learned from the synthesis of land- grounded in sustainable food production systems and practices as described in able practices into agriculture, how scape architecture theory and sustain- permaculture and organic farming? can design strategies be employed on able agriculture. The design exemplifi es the Kansas State University campus to how an observer can be informed, make apparent and understandable an infl uenced, and persuaded in regard to Figure 1.2|Project Dilemma and Research Question alternative approach that is grounded a regenerative food production model. The dilemma of environmental degradation due to modern industrial agriculture gives rise to the in sustainable food production systems Two design scenarios are brought research question of how landscape architecture can promote sustainable agriculture and practices as described in permacul- together to show a blend of the reality (diagram by author). ture and organic farming? of an infl uential and comprehensive for the Kansas State “The Fruits of Landscape” studies University campus site with regenera- the intricate strategies of sustainable tive food production. The results of and regenerative food production as this project are design explanations of expressed in the teachings of permac- site features (including ecological and ulture and organic farming, while also aesthetic functions), productivity po- illustrating how landscapes can be tential, water harvesting strategies and designed to infl uence the observer to potential, and integration of produce recognize, comprehend and to some with Derby Dining Center menu and extent, appreciate these technologies. food needs.

4 Chapter 2| Introduction The Fruits of Landscape 5 Background2

6 Chapter 1| Introduction here are several contexts that Jackson – founder of a perennial agri- Design Fundamentals have informed this project. The culture research operation; the Land Architecture: Form, Space and Order Francis D.K. Ching fi rst is the context of agriculture. Institute in Salina, Kansas – reminds T Sustainable/Regenerative A design for food production even at his readers that even back in the late Agriculture a small scale on a university campus 1970’s the United States exported up to The Nature of Design necessitates an understanding of the 45 billion dollars worth of food to other David Orr evolution of the issues concerning countries (Jackson 2011). In the 2012 Nature as Measure Wes Jackson agriculture in the United States. The fi scal year the USDA calculated 137.4 for second context is that of landscape in- billion dollars in the export of all U.S. fl uence. Authors such as Robert Thayer, agricultural products, while U.S. do- John T. Lyle Consulting the Genius of the Place Marc Treib, Joan Nassauer, Francis mestic farm net income was only 117.9 Wes Jackson Iteration 1 - Sustainable Ching and Laurie Olin, have written billion (USDA 2011; USDA 2012). A study Food Production Sustainable Ag. Strategies in Regenerative Agriculture concerning the design of landscape and on U.S. consumption of food imports Permaculture how spaces become legible and mean- versus domestic consumption reveals Permaculture: A Practical Guide Cyclical Food Production System For Sustainable Development Resulting Strategies ingful. Another integral context is that that imported food constitutes 17% or Bill Mollison Resource Efficiency and Minimization of Waste of campus food production. Several 358 pounds out of the 2,100 pounds of The Basics of Permaculture Design Water Harvesting and Management Ross Mars precedents involving permaculture and per-capita consumption (USDA “Import Modeling Ecological Systems and Soil Regeneration and Fertility Maintenance Edible Forest Gardens vol. 1 & 2 Processes organic farming in the university setting Share of Consumption” 2012). These Dave Jacke Maximizing the Edge (Natural Circulation will be discussed. In addition, periph- numbers refl ect the unavailability of Gaia’s Garden Patterns and Forms) Toby Hemenway eral literature regarding the theoretical certain food items in the U.S. due to Interview with Hilary Noonan: Exhibited Guild Planting framework for the site design, Kansas climate conditions and the lower cost LA/Permaculturalist in KC Didactic Terracing State campus history and specifi c associated with imported items (USDA K-State Campus practical considerations of the campus “Import Share of Consumption” 2012). From Farm to Campus Iteration 2 - Landscape Integration of Natural Bed Patterns in Public are employed. The project objectives The above data indicates that 1) the Richard Longstreth Influence Circulation Routes Interview with Mark Taussig: Context Congruency benefi t from a clear understanding of U.S. receives over half of its agricultural Campus Landscape Educational Signage Interview with Mark Edwards: Creative assembly of familiar parts agriculture, landscape infl uence, and income through exports, 2) imported Consideration of K-State Master Plan Derby Dining Hall Unit Director campus food production. See Litera- food makes up 17% of the average Didactic landscape Campus Landscape: ture Map (Figure 2.1). American’s diet, and 3) that the food Functions, Forms, Features Perception of Ecological Robert Thayer that we eat either imported or domes- Landscapes tically produced has traveled around Agriculture Circulation: Landscape Influence Currently, Americans travel to the 4200 miles to get to the store from Approach which the consumer buys it. Must Landscapes Mean? Entrance grocery store to buy food to meet Marc Treib Path-Space Relationships their nutritional needs. According to Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames There is the potential through the local, Joan Iverson Nassauer a study conducted by Christopher L. small-scale and diverse production of The Experience of Sustainable Landscapes Weber and H. Scott Matthews from the food to make our agricultural model Department of Civil and Environmental Robert Thayer in the U.S. more effi cient and sustain- Form, Meaning & Expression and the Department of En- able in terms of transportation. The Laurie Olin gineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Gray World Green Heart U.S. model currently involves negative Robert Thayer Mellon University, on average our food impacts on freshness, fuel consumption has a total life-cycle mileage of ap- costs, ecological resources (fragment- Figure 2.1|Literature Map proximately 4,200 miles, not including ed by transportation ), The Literature Map shows the connection between concepts drawn from key sources and design iterations 1 our trips to the grocery store (Weber and clean air due to carbon emissions. and 2. The concepts are further synthesized through the design process producing a list of design strategies & Matthews 2008). Furthermore, Wes Aside from the transportation of pro- (diagram by author).

8 Chapter 2| Background The Fruits of Landscape 9 duced food, the production of food is a production; use agriculture as an instru- bureaucratic division” (Orr 2002, 29). • Aggregating not isolating system of industrial technology where ment for the expansion of industry…” In other words a better model requires • Seeking optimum levels for mul- large amounts of ecological resources whereby, Jackson suggests that the a holistic approach that is informed by tiple functions instead of the maxi- and services are used, discarded and hereditary information in the gene pool the processes in the natural environ- mum or minimum level for any one often synthetically replaced in a linear of and livestock is decreased and ment on which we depend. • Matching technology to need system to produce a few types of use- “nature is dominated or ignored with • Using information to replace ful products in enormous quantities. each plowing and chemical application” John Lyle in Regenerative Design for power This system involves the depletion of (Jackson 2011, 180). Sustainable Development gives his • Providing multiple pathways natural resources and the overfi lling of defi nition of a regenerative system: “A • Seeking common solutions to dis- areas with often hazardous bi-products. In recent years, the regenerative system provides for con- parate problems John Tillman Lyle, former landscape ar- movement has addressed part of the tinuous replacement, through its own • Managing storage as a key to sus- chitecture professor at California State problem of our industrial mindset. It functional processes, of the energy tainability University, Pomona, comments on this is now becoming widely understood and materials used in its operation” • Shaping form to guide fl ow set of conditions identifying our current that the resources being consumed in (Lyle 1994, 10). Refer back to Figure • Shaping form to manifest process agricultural structure: our linear systems of production will 2.2. A regenerative system, then, is one • Prioritizing for sustainability not last forever. By making our sys- that recreates resources and/or makes “What such situations are telling us is tems sustainable, eff orts are made to degraded materials and resources that the one-way throughput system, continue to increase effi ciency while VS. useful again by virtue of its way of An example of the practical out work- like most human inventions but unlike recycling waste. functioning. Regenerative systems can ings of the above principles exists nature’s recycling material fl ows, has be thought of as essential components in the development of a “perennial a linear time dimension built in with a Sustainability involves inventing ways to truly sustainable systems in which agriculture.” In late September of 2012 descending curve: Eventually a one- of using those resources that can be no potential for resource degradation at the annual Prairie Festival by the way system destroys the landscapes on renewed (i.e. bio-fuel, wind, and solar is overlooked. With this understanding Land Institute in Salina Kansas, staff which it depends” (Lyle 1994, 5). See energy). The intent of sustainability the sources of problems are addressed researchers reported on their progress Figure 2.2 initiatives, however, is to create sys- rather than just the symptoms. in developing methods and species to tems that can sustain themselves and be used in a perennial agriculture (Cruz, The science of industry and the appar- continue producing indefi nitely. Other There are many examples for the et. Al 2012). Through a process of grow- ent power of new technologies are than the fact that many environmental Figure 2.2|Linear Versus Regenera- design of regenerative systems that ing and cross-pollinating thousands of what currently drive most of the eff orts impacts are still overlooked even in tive Environmental Systems. have already been developed and on site, the Land Institute has of human enterprise including our food what many would call sustainable or implemented. Some examples provide John Lyle describes the difference between the made exciting progress in developing production. David Orr, the Paul Sears “green” energy systems (i.e. ethanol industrial system (linear) and the regenerative a theoretical basis for approaching pro- perennial forms of milo, sunfl owers and Distinguished Professor of Environ- production), sustainability falls short in system (cyclical). In the first system, resources ductivity in the landscape while others wheat (See Figure 2.3-5). With peren- mental Studies and Politics at Oberlin solving the intrinsic problem of envi- are used producing waste which is left in sinks are practical alternatives to currently nial agriculture, soil is less prone to College, describes the present agricul- ronmental degradation that has already instead of returned to the system. The regen- linear production models. erosion, water is accessed at greater tural problem we face in this way: “The occurred (Pimentel & Patzek 2005). erative system, loses only a little energy in the depths (increasing plant hardiness in In 1994 Lyle proposed twelve strate- modern dilemma is that we fi nd our- process of cycling resources over and over drought), and carefully selected pro- There is a need for “regenerative” sys- again (Lyle 1994, 5, 10). gies for creating regenerative systems selves trapped between the growing duction and support species are grown tems. Orr proposes that can be applied as an overarching cleverness of our science and technol- in close proximity to one another for as the engine for solving the problems economic model. A diff erent solution ogy and our seeming incapacity to act symbiosis. In addition, by virtue of be- imposed by our current industrial to problems than a “bigger hammer” wisely” (Orr 2002, 29). Wes Jackson, ing a perennial agriculture, labor and model: “Ecological design is an art by (or plow as the case may be) comes to well-known author and founder of the investments like replanting, cultivating, which we aim to restore and maintain mind here (Lyle 1994, 48): Land Institute, claims that the intrinsic spraying and irrigating can in some cas- the wholeness of the entire fabric of actions of modern agriculture are to es be completely eliminated. Though life increasingly fragmented by spe- • Considering nature as both model “Subdue or ignore nature; increase no doubt unpopular with the major cialization, scientifi c reductionism, and and context

10 Chapter 2| Background The Fruits of Landscape 11 seed companies , this research has the In other words, permaculture is a applicable in ecological design and project is a design for a highly sustain- potential to transform the entire Ameri- framework that informs and guides a . able and productive edible landscape. can agricultural system that for so long whole systems approach to productive However, the other half of the design has invested in various forms of annual landscapes. It is not static, but dynamic, Informing this project are several problem involves displaying the power crop production. changing and site specifi c. Permacul- manuals on permaculture that describe of landscape form in presenting sus- ture shows that every element within practical strategies stemming from tainable food production strategies Permaculture is a regenerative design the landscape whether designed or the above 12 principles. Bill Mollison’s in the campus setting of Kansas State model that encapsulates regenerative natural is connected with every other Permaculture: A Practical Guide for a University (K-State). The following is agricultural strategies along with all element and often succeeds or fails Sustainable Future, Dave Jacke’s Edible a discussion of how the perception of aspects of sustainable human living and based on that relationship. It not only Forest Gardens Volumes 1 and 2, The sustainable landscapes can be aff ected function through a similar set of twelve teaches food production, but a way of Basics of Permaculture Design by Ross and improved by landscape form. principles for action. Permaculture was life that is sensitive and responsible in Mars, and Gaia’s Garden: A Guide to developed by Australian Bill Mollison regard to the sustainability of the earth. Home-Scale Peramculture by Toby Hem- There are several fundamental ways and his colleague David Holmgren in Figure 2.3|Intermediate Wheatgrass Figure 2.5|Perennial Sunflowers enway all describe strategies under the landscape form and space infl uences 1978. Mollison and other proponents Although permaculture is becoming (photo courtesy of the Land Institute). (photo courtesy of the Land Institute). following four categories. the occupant. Francis Ching, Professor of permaculture, describe the specifi c somewhat of a buzzword these days, Emeritus in the department of architec- practices and skills in permaculture it does provide a system under which • Water Harvesting and Manage- ture at the University of Washington, (such as water catchment strategies, numerous sustainable and regenerative ment (Gaia’s Garden p. 96, Edible in Architecture: Form, Space, And Order the zone/sector principle, creating agriculture and strategies Forest Gardens, The Basics of Perma- illustrates the fundamental defi nitions edge and microclimates, and symbiotic are tied together. Holmgren organizes culture Design p. 84, Permaculture of space and form and how order is pest control techniques), Holmgren the principles of permaculture under p. 152, 336, 413.) created by these elements. Ching’s fun- approaches permaculture from a more twelve points: • Soil Regeneration and Mainte- damental design principles can trans- theoretical perspective. Each skill, nance (Edible Forest Gardens p. 75, late easily into landscape architecture, concept or principle is present in his • Observe and interact, The Basics of Permaculture Design p. particularly in regard to circulation. book Permaculture: Principles and Path- • Catch and store energy, 51, Gaia’s Garden p. 71.) Ching notes that the approach, the ways Beyond Sustainability, but each • Obtain a yield, • Maximizing the Edge, Natural Cir- entrance, the confi guration of the path, is dissected in terms of its theoretical • Apply self-regulation and accept culation Patterns and Forms (Gaia’s path-space relationships, and the form reasoning and signifi cance in the over- feedback, Garden p. 96, Edible Forest Gardens, of the circulation space, all aff ect the all intention of a sustainable lifestyle. • Use and value renewable resources The Basicsof Permaculture Design p. experience of the viewer and how the In his conclusions, Holmgren describes and services, 84, Permaculture p. 152, 336, 413.) occupant perceives his/her surround- the permaculture way as, • Produce no waste, • Guild Planting (Gaia’s Garden 192, ings (Ching 2007, 241). • Design from patterns to details, The Basics of Permaculture Design p. “…a dynamic interplay between two • Integrate rather than segregate, 62, Edible Forest Gardens p. 121). In the simplest terms, attention to phases: on the one hand, sustaining life • Use small and slow solutions, circulation confi gurations can infl u- within the cycle of the seasons, and on • Use and value diversity, ence the viewer to a certain end. For the other, conceptual abstraction and • Use edges and value the marginal, These four categories of strategies example an axial or frontal approach emotional intensity of creativity and • Creatively use and respond to Figure 2.4|Development of Peren- were utilized in conjunction with to a certain site gives the viewer time design…It is the steady, cyclical and change. nial Sorghum strategies drawn from literature on to perceive and understand what is at humble engagement with nature that (photo courtesy of the Land Institute). landscape architecture theory. Refer to the terminus of the path (See Figure provides the sustenance for the spark Literature Map (See Figure 2.1). 2.4). Another example is the use of an of insight and integration (integrity), This set of principles was born out of entrance, which Ching defi nes as that which, in turn, informs and transforms the intention of a better way of produc- Landscape Influence which “involves the act of penetrat- the practice” (Holmgren 2002, 271). ing food and living sustainably at the The second part of this project is con- ing a vertical plane that distinguishes homestead scale, whereas John Lyle’s cerned with landscape infl uence. The one space from another and separates twelve principles are more broadly

12 Chapter 2| Background The Fruits of Landscape 13 ‘here’ from ‘there’” (Ching 2007, 250). villager is beautifully ordered and in ship. Yet, with such commitment to perception of landscapes that exhibit The entrance to a space promotes harmony, while the clipped lawns and higher learning and research, it could a lot of ecological functionality. People particular attention in the viewer to the pruned roses of the pseudo-aristocrat be argued that the landscapes sur- tend to perceive a naturally functioning character of the space being entered are nature in wild disarray” (Mollison rounding such activity should display ecosystem as unkempt, disorganized (See Figure 2.5). Path-Space relation- 1978, 31). cutting edge environmental technology and informal. It is a unique opportunity, ships are infl uential in guiding the and ecological stewardship integrated however, when we see the potential of occupant of a site through (See Figure Although speaking in ecological terms, within formal, manicured design. The landscape architecture to give perceiv- 2.6). If the path is curvilinear, oppor- Mollison is consistent with the “form reason for reluctance in this integration able form and beauty to a “messy” eco- tunities to guide view arise when the follows function” Figure 2.6|Frontal Approach may be because of the perception of system. Nassauer claims that the de- path bends. The occupant’s line of site coined by Louis Sullivan in reference Approaching an element on axis from the front sustainable landscapes as unattractive sign problem for landscape is directed fi rst to one point, and then to aesthetics for skyscrapers in Chi- directs the viewer’s attention of that element and informal. in making natural processes recogniz- cago (Sullivan 1896). In regard to the over the duration of the journey another as the path undulates back and (Ching 2007, 243). able and acceptable “…requires the forth. These views along a path to adja- function of natural ecology, function is Landscapes are being perceived in translation of ecological patterns into cent or related spaces can be described beautiful and there is an ever increas- many diff erent ways and have varying cultural language” (Nassauer 1995). as tangential views. Thus, fundamen- ing need for the implementation of degrees of infl uence on their occu- tal understanding of form and space ecologically functional and productive pants. A popular type of landscape Nassauer off ers further insight into and their relationships to one-another landscapes. However, Robert Thayer– observed in any or formal cam- this dilemma by pointing out the need yields opportunities for directing the Professor Emeritus in landscape archi- pus in our modern society is one that for the perception of human intention experience of the viewer in intentional tecture at the University of California indicates constant and meticulous care, or in her words, “cues to care” such Davis – in “The Experience of Sustain- Figure 2.8|Path-Space Relationship one that is cleanly manicured, one that as mown turf, fl owering plants and ways. Path-Space Relationships include scenarios in able Landscapes” cautions landscape which the occupant passes by, passes through, off ers the resemblance of nature and trees, wildlife feeders and , bold Landscape has the potential to inten- working under the philoso- or comes to a stop in a space yet remains under strict human control. patterns, trimmed shrubs, plants in tionally guide the occupant. However, phy of sustainability not to neglect con- (Ching 2007, 278). Joan Iverson Nassauer – a professor rows, linear planting , fences, a specifi c message must be in mind. Un- cern over the form of those landscapes. of landscape architecture in the school architectural details, lawn ornaments, intentional, negative messages remove Thayer claims that if designers leave of Natural Resources and Environment painting, and foundation planting. She the opportunity for eff ective landscape the formation of landscape entirely up at the University of Michigan – refers claims that people are more likely to infl uence. The strategies underlying to utility and function, sustainable out- to this kind of landscape as one that see ecologically sustainable landscapes permaculture as well as other sustain- door environments are at of being we have accepted as more than just as aesthetically pleasing if they can able landscape applications may be misunderstood (Thayer 1989, 105). a product of culture. Nassauer claims recognize the mark of human intention considered visually chaotic and messy. that people are mistaking the pristine upon those landscapes. For, example, Eff orts must be made to convince the The university campus landscape is one Figure 2.7|Entrance and well maintained landscapes for in the case of a few acres of naturally occupant of the intentionality of such of the arenas in which this dilemma Entrances are real or implied vertical planes the long forgotten, healthy function- diverse prairie, one might perceive it as landscapes. surfaces. In terms of the campus through which the occupant passes, traveling ing natural environment, labeling them such in a positive light if, for example, from one space to another (Ching 2007, 250). landscape, although there is support “picturesque” (Nassauer 1995). Since there is a mown strip edging around Bill Mollison expresses order in the in certain departments and administra- not everyone is educated in ecological the outside. Because of this the ob- landscape in terms of function rather tions within universities for sustain- function, plant material, ecosystem server – being familiar with the mainte- than form. He claims, able landscapes, there still seems to composition, sustainable landscapes nance activity of mowing – has a way be a desire for the formal, manicured such as prairies, rain gardens, con- of knowing that the apparently vacant, “Order is found in things working quadrangles and plazas exhibited in structed wetlands, or permaculture overgrown grassy area is intended benefi cially together. It is not the many of our nation’s centers for higher food forests, can easily be perceived as to be there and is serving a specifi c forced condition of neatness, tidiness, education. Understandably, reasons overgrown or unattractive. function. Nassauer explains this issue and straightness all of which are, in for such landscapes include creating en- further: design or energy terms, disordered… vironments consistent with the culture Nassauer’s Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Thus the seemingly-wild and naturally- of prestigious academia and scholar- Frames explains the dilemma of the functioning garden of a New Guinea

14 Chapter 2| Background The Fruits of Landscape 15 “…we might assume that a nature pre- There is a need for sustainable land- otherwise, certain things can be taught new we must start with what is or has ency (appealing to the vernacular), serve represents the absence of human scapes to communicate design strat- through landscapes. been and change it in some way to reassembling familiar parts, providing infl uence when in fact the existence of egies with their observers through make it fresh in some way” (Olin 1988, cues to sustainability, and providing a intact remnants of indigenous ecosys- form how do we make our landscapes However, Treib goes on to suggest 155). clear message that confronts the user tems depends upon human protection legible, meaningful and infl uential? that a landscape that teaches you through the positioning of design ele- and management” (Nassauer 1995, Marc Treib – retired professor from the something through creating intentional In the article, Olin references the semi- ments for a direct approach and clear 161). University of California at Berkley – in forms and experiences cannot make a nal works of Andrê Le Nôtre and Lance- views in the landscape. There is need his well-known article Must Landscapes landscape success, signifi cant or mean- lot Brown. The author identifi es visual for the promotion of regenerative agri- On the other hand Nassauer also warns Mean: Approaches to Signifi cance in ingful on its own. A didactic landscape scale and creative assemblage as two cultural systems that utilize ecological against the assumption that landscape Recent Landscape Architecture discuss- can be a powerful tool in educating of the major strategies evident in these functions. Potential exists in designed design only deceives people about es several diff erent ways landscapes people about certain processes, ideas designers’ works. Olin argues that land- landscape to encourage this message what is really happening ecologically. have expressed meaningful historically and even philosophies of life, but is scapes do become meaningful and suc- through creating positive and didactic Nassauer argues, “Equating design and in the present. Treib identifi es fi ve limited to attempts to communicating cessful through the materials and ob- experiences that immerse the occu- with deceit leaves no room to acknowl- approaches for creating signifi cance specifi c teaching agendas. Treib claims jects with which they are built, through pant in messages of sustainable food edge how design is necessary to repre- in landscapes: the Neoarchaic, the the Didactic landscape will fall short of the “expression of the relationship production. sent and maintain ecological function” Genius of the Place, the Zeitgeist, the becoming meaningful in and of itself. of society to nature” and the premise (Nassauer 1995, 162). Vernacular Landscape, and the Didactic In other words, a landscape can be that nature is “the ur-metaphor of art” (Treib 1995, 49). Treib’s premise in this designed with didactic intention, yet and thus is the key source of ideas that Robert Thayer also discusses the is- article is that ultimately landscapes are the success of the landscape in terms might be expressed through the art of sue of the perception of sustainable not given meaning by their designers, of it’s resulting signifi cance and mean- landscape architecture (Olin 1988, 156). landscapes and their functions in Gray but that meaning develops through ing depends not only on the message See Literature Map for summary of the World, Green Heart. The author laments interactions, i.e. “the intersection of the attempts to communicate, literature distillation into the following the fact that in spite of the ecological people and place” and “like a patina, but the skill with which the project is design strategies. awareness of the 1970s, sustainable signifi cance is acquired only with time. designed and implemented. The experi- landscapes were starting to fall back • Didactic Terracing (presentation And like a patina, it emerges only if the ence that actually occurs during the into a counter cultural status (Thayer of food production terraces along conditions are right” (Treib 1995, 60). interaction of people with the place 1994). This was written more than is still slightly outside the designer’s major circulation paths) twenty years ago and still landscaping This project studies the way in which control. • Integration of Natural Bed Patterns companies are off ering what Thayer landscape form can resent ecological in Public Circulation Routes calls “token service to environmental principles in food production to the Laurie Olin – , • Educational Signage stewardship values” (Thayer 1994, observer. Thus, keeping in mind that a teacher, and author – off ers insights in • Consideration of K-State Master 102). Landscape architects are to act landscape designer has limited abil- landscape architecture regarding mean- Plan to make our landscapes sustainable. ity to create meaning instantaneously ingful landscape form and composi- But sustainability is not divorced from through the construction of a designed tion in Form Meaning and Expression in visual, tangible order. The solution isn’t landscape, Treib’s discussion of the Landscape Architecture. Olin addresses Summary in changing our desire for beauty by Didactic is helpful in illuminating the the issue of creativity. Designers in all In summary, landscapes become mean- making do with what many might per- opportunity to confront observers fi elds are constantly facing the struggle ingful in various ways. Though instant ceive as the “ugliness” of sustainable with lessons in ecological design. Treib to create spaces, objects, solutions meaning is very diffi cult, if possible, landscapes. The literature indicates that defi nes didactic landscapes in this way. that are unique and new. Olin provides to bestow on a space through design, there is a need for care, creativity and “A Didactic landscape is supposedly some insight into this struggle specifi - landscape architect can create the op- art in the design of our sustainable and an aesthetic textbook on natural, or in cally with landscape form by stating, portunity for the interaction of people regenerative landscapes, not excluding some cases urban, processes” (Treib and place in a way that conveys a cer- “In nature are all the forms. In our the realm of food production. 1995, 53). In other words, through the tain message. Strategies to accomplish imagination is their discernment and creation of experiences either visual, or this include creating context congru- abstraction.”… “To make something

16 Chapter 2| Background The Fruits of Landscape 17 Pecedents & Interviews3

18 Chapter 2| Background griculture systems in the U.S. are The garden has fi ve components: the somewhat organic and seemly chaotic K-State also has a student organic farm slowly evolving from linear and vegetable garden, the , the growth patterns, the garden’s design located about 10 miles from campus. Aindustrial systems to sustain- edge, edible landscapes, and has dealt with the visual elements of The Student Farm was started by able and regenerative ones particularly herbs and medicinal species (See Figure permaculture in a way that positively faculty member Rhonda in movements toward organic farm- 3.2). Each of these garden realms in- aff ects the perception of this sustain- Janke, Ph.D. and graduate student ing and permaculture. At the cutting cludes species that serve some function able landscape. This was accomplished Lani Meyer. Like Middlebury, the farm edge of this agricultural revolution are for the benefi t of other parts of the by a design that was oriented toward includes many organic agriculture centers for higher education. Food garden. Nitrogen fi xation, pest-insect multiple uses that included not only strategies such as cover crop plant- production on college and univer- repulsion, pollinator attraction, reduc- food production and plant growth, ing, composting, and crop rotation. sity campuses is not unprecedented. tion of competition, and nutrient but a place to sit or space to wander Student internships and part-time paid Many projects display this initiative on uptake are functions of the Franklin Figure 3.1|Franklin Permaculture through. positions as well as volunteer work campuses across the country. Projects garden plant list and garden composi- Garden Figure 3.3|Franklin Permaculture have kept the farm going since its birth. that employ specifi cally permacultural tion (Harb 2012). The Franklin Permaculture Garden at UMASS Another helpful precedent is the However, funding has come almost methodologies are relatively new, but Amherst was a collaborative effort initiated by Garden Plantings organic farm at Middlebury College entirely from grants which have not have already been exemplifi ed in a few The produce from the Franklin perma- a group of students in 2009 with the involve- Intensive planting integration at the Franklin in central Vermont (See Figure 3.4). always been abundant. In additions, Permaculture garden provides for a highly pro- U.S. universities. culture garden is used in the dining ment of professors, and volunteers (“UMASS Middlebury staff and students maintain because of the farms distance from halls at UMASS Amherst. The school Permaculture” 2012). ductive and supportive ecological environment this thriving 3 acre organic farm off (Harb 2012). campus, maintenance and labor in the Precedent Projects has a policy in place that requires the campus that produces food for farm- garden has created more expense due incorporation of local produce to be ers markets and other local businesses to travel time and fuel costs. The farm One such example is the permaculture 30% of the entire fresh produce diet for (Farm Report 2010). The farm has been initiative at the University of Massa- has sold produce to K-State Dining at campus dining halls. Collaboration ex- in existence since 2002 and is now a times, but the constraint has been the chusetts Amherst. Starting in 2009, ists between the UMASS Permaculture well developed and functioning organic several students taking a sustainable price at which their produce has to be organization and the UMASS Food Sub- garden. The mission of the organic farm set. Derby Dining Hall can buy produce agriculture class at the university along committee to get fresh produce from indicates the desire to make organic with graduate student Ryan Harb, of- and other food at much lower prices the campus gardens into the menu at produce more accessible, aff ordable than that at which the student farm has fered a proposal to transform an open the university dining halls (Harb 2012). and more delicious (Mission 2013). lawn near the Franklin Dining Hall into to set theirs. According to Unit Director Middlebury organic farm has off ered Mark Edwards (See interview discus- a quarter acre permaculture garden Another similar project exists at Ithaca full-time summer internship programs, sion below), the dining service is willing (See Figure 3.1). The fi rst school year College in Ithaca, NY nestled in the volunteer opportunities, and numerous to buy these foods for higher prices was spent preparing the soil horizons Finger Lakes. Located at the southeast community and university events and since they are produced by K-State, but through a layering of rich organic com- corner of Williams Hall, the garden has presentations. The farm produces a it would be unrealistic to think that the post, mulch and cardboard. With the been a success particularly in terms of variety of fresh vegetables, herbs, fruit bulk of the produce would be bought help of 1,000 volunteers, after the fi rst its educational infl uence and its ability and honey. The majority of the space from the student farm or other local growing season, the garden produced to draw passersby (See Figure 3.3). at the farm is dedicated to maximizing vendors (Edwards, 2012). 1,000 pounds of produce from 1,500 , education, serving as food production in order to continue plants of 150 diff erent species. In addi- a gateway, sustainable landscaping and Figure 3.2|Franklin Permaculture Figure 3.4|IC Permaculture Site to meet the needs of their current local Several learning outcomes from this Ithaca College Permaculture garden is located tion, the food was used by the dining accessibility were all design consider- Garden Aerial clients. However, some of the garden is case are evident. The fi rst concerns halls to feed UMASS students. Since ations at the birth of this productive The Franklin Permaculture Garden exhibits natu- adjacent to Williams Hall along a major circula- tion path in the campus. The garden promotes designated for experimental use. Other the soil. UMASS Permaculture is in the then, the class in sustainable agricul- space (Our Goals, 2012). The garden ral bed patterns, symbiotic relationships, and permacultural strategies by inviting people with sustainable strategies at Middlebury process of designing and implement- ture has started two other permac- eff ectively establishes itself through ecological food production (“UMASS Permaculture” 2012). seating and enclosure (“Garden Gallery” 2013). organic farm include cover-cropping, ing another permaculture garden near ulture projects on campus and plan form, circulation and the abundance of attracting benefi cial insect predators the Berkshire dining hall. The site they to continue the tradition year after life found within. Though permaculture and pollinators, production of biofuel, are working with is characterized by year with each new senior class (Anon strategies involve dense plantings, and composting. incredibly compact soil conditions. 2012). generous preliminary mulching, and The organization is implementing soil

20 Chapter 3| Case Studies & Interviews The Fruits of Landscape 21 remediation strategies such as bio- with higher educational value. This interview. Noonan expressed through Mark Taussig, the K-State campus land- swales, erosion control techniques, and diversity will allow for the garden to her explanation of specifi c projects scape architect, off ered several specifi c deep-rooted perennial species that will function as a productive benefi t to the that she has worked on that perma- insights during the interview. Taussig aerate the soil over time. The site on Derby Dining Hall and as an educational culture projects take a long time to explained the history of the site in Kansas State’s campus with which this tool for diff erent academic depart- mature. She indicated that this is often terms of previous use of the landscape. Master’s project is concerned, includes ments such as the department of Land- an obstacle in promoting projects like He noted that the site was historically areas of fi ll soil which have the poten- scape Architecture and Horticulture as this because of people’s desire for im- used for a tree nursery and exhibition tial of being very compact and low well as the college of Agriculture. mediate results. Another concept she garden for the Horticulture depart- quality. Strategies including those listed emphasized was, when approaching ment. He also, discussed the facets of above inform the implementation and Middlebury Dining Services has success- a project in which your intention is to the K-State Master Plan Update talking maintenance structure of “The Fruits of fully contracted with the organic farm employ permaculture strategies, think about circulation and infrastructure in regard to certain produce they know Landscape.” Figure 3.5|IC Permaculture Garden in terms of what specifi c things you can improvements as well as the explora- they will be able to use in their menus. do. In other words, by understanding tion of public transit and the research Another learning point has to do with Apparently, Middlebury Dining Services Plantings what resources you have available you expansion goals of the university. support from educational institution. deems the price for its very own locally The garden exhibits a diverse planting scheme, can propose only those permaculture Taussig mentioned that K-State Hous- including not only food production species, but The long-term vitality of this project grown produce worth serving it on strategies that make the most sense ing and Dining was recently added to depends on consistent and informed its menu. This displays some promise other supportive perennials (“Garden Gallery 2013). given the existing conditions. Every the Master Plan scope and would be a maintenance and management. The in similar integration of locally grown permaculture strategy ever conceived part of the campus master plan update. three case studies above illustrate food with the menu at the K-State Din- doesn’t have to be a part of the design. the integral relationship of university/ ing Halls. Finally, she stressed the importance of In speaking specifi cally about the goals college faculty and students in the soil and water management. Noonan of this project he noted that there creation and maintenance of their Interviews mentioned that the fi rst thing she looks is opportunity for learning through gardens. This suggests that for this kind Interviewing was a technique em- for in approaching a site for design hands on maintenance and up-keep of of a project to be just as successful as ployed to ground this project initiative Figure 3.7|Middlebury Organic alternatives is where the water is com- the garden. He also, made mention of these precedents, a solid labor and edu- in terms of the K-State Campus land- Farm: Kitchen Garden ing from and going. In addition, she existing site conditions to consider in cational structure needs to be in place scape, Derby Dining Hall, and practi- Detail view of plantings at the Middlebury kitchen emphasized the vital importance of the proposing a design. These conditions for the garden to be eff ectively imple- cal permaculture. Three informants garden (“Photos” 2013). plants you choose to use and how their included fi ll material existing under mented, maintained, and expanded in provided substantive responses in face arrangement and combination eff ec- site parking lots (whatever that might its educational, cultural and economic to face interviews conducted towards tively use and maintain soil nutrients. be), utilities traversing the site, and the value. the end of the fall semester of 2012. potential for existing soil and water The second informant was chosen contamination. In both the Ithaca and UMASS perma- See Appendix A for entire interview framework. from the K-State Campus Master Plan culture projects, outstanding student Update Task Force in an eff ort to gain Finally, an informant was chosen to body and faculty support has been The fi rst respondent, Hilary Noonan, Figure 3.6|Middlebury Organic an understanding of the vision for the represent the Derby Food Center evident (Harb 2012; Home 2013). This was chosen for her expertise in the campus in the future. The intent was to and K-State Housing and Dining. This could be in part because of the location Farm Aerial View interview was conducted with the Unit realm of permaculture. Noonan has a The 3 acre Middlebury Organic Farm is a well increase the viability of the project by each of these garden project being on degree in Landscape architecture as established, highly productive space providing enabling complementation rather than Director at Derby Dining Hall, Mark the campuses and visible to all from well as a certifi cate in permaculture. fresh produce, education, and employment for confl iction with the proposed campus Edwards. Edwards was sought out with day to day. This respondent was approached in Middlebury students (“Organic Farm” 2013). master plan update. This interview was questions concerning specifi c informa- also intended to provide an expert tion on the produce needs of the dining There are a few lessons to be learned the hope of gaining information in opinion on landscape design issues hall and how a permaculture garden from Middlebury Organic farm specifi - regard to practical design strategies for accomplishing both the aesthetic specifi c to K-State. could fi t within their system of food cally. First, the produce species list of service. the project should include both com- and productivity goals of this project. mercial production types and species Several insights were gained from this

22 Chapter 3| Case Studies & Interviews The Fruits of Landscape 23 Edwards discussed sustainable initia- tives currently going on at Derby includ- ing composting & recycling programs as well as obtaining meat and dairy products locally from the K-State Farm. Edwards also mentioned the dilemma regarding the purchase of local pro- duce versus that which is available from mass production farms hundreds of miles away. He talked about the price diff erence between the two options, lo- cal produce being a lot more expensive than the produce that is available for in- dustrial vendors. However, he indicated that Derby would be interested in buy- ing specialty items or vintage varieties for certain themed dinners or seasons in order to substantiate the advertising eff orts of K-State Dining Services. Figure 3.8|Grant Park Kitchen Garden, , IL Photo courtesy of Lee Skabelund, 2009.

Figure 3.9|Grant Park Kitchen Garden, Chicago, IL Photo courtesy of Lee Skabelund, 2009.

24 Chapter 3| Case Studies & Interviews The Fruits of Landscape 25 Site Selection & Analysis4

26 Chapter 3| Case Studies & Interviews he project site was located on the Kansas State University Campus (K-State) for several reasons. The T Slope Aspect campus environment was chosen for this project because of opportunities regarding educational use, wide diver- sity of infl uence, and for its convenient proximity for site visits. In addition, K-State was originally an agricultural college. Craftsmanship, hands-on education, and food production were essentials in K-State’s early curriculum. Slope Percentage In promoting small-scale land manage- Site Selection ment technologies and sustainable agriculture, this project fi ts within the historic context of K-State. Site Suitability Analysis Within the K-State campus, the project site was chosen based on principles Site Soils from permaculture. Five factors were chosen from the literature on per- maculture to determine the optimal location for a sustainable and produc- tive food garden (See Figure 4.1). The K-State campus was rated based on these factors on a scale of 1-5 (least suitable to most suitable). In addition, Stream Buffer each factor was assigned a weight of infl uence based on level of importance (See Table 4.1). The results of this analy- sis indicated sites near the Kramer, Van Zile and Derby dining complexes. Through on-site investigation it was determined that the current land-use adjacent to Derby on the west side of Dining Hall Proximity the complex provided the best oppor- tunity for this project (See Figure 4.2). Further explanation and enlarged ver- sions of the suitability factor maps can be found in Appendix C. N Figure 4.1|Site Suitability Factors Figure 4.2|Suitability Analysis Results Areas around Derby, Van Zile and Kramer Dining Hall indicated suitability for this project type. However, space adjacent Suitability of a permaculture garden on the K-State Campus was chosen based on the above factors to Derby was chosen for opportunities regarding existing site usage (analysis by author). See Appendix C. (analysis by author). See Appendix C.

28 Chapter 4| Site Selection & Analysis The Fruits of Landscape 29 Existing Conditions The project site consists of approxi- SiteSuitabilityFactors SuitabilityRating* FactorWeight mately 3.5 acres between the Derby SlopePercentage 10% Dining Hall Complex (adjacent to PercentageRanges Moore Hall, West Hall and Derby Dining 3URSRVHG3URMHFW 0Ͳ3% 4 Hall) to the east and the International /RFDWLRQ Student Center and Campus Creek to 3Ͳ8.83% 5 the West (See Figure 4.3). Clafl in Road 8.83Ͳ15% 3 serves as the northern border of the 15Ͳ25% 2 site while Mid-Campus Drive and Old >25% 1 Clafl in Road boarder the site on the PoximitytoDiningHall 20% western and southern sides respective- DistanceFromDiningHall ly. The majority of campus educational 0Ͳ100ft 5 (DV\$FFHVVWR buildings are located to the west and 101Ͳ500ft 4 south. The campus decreases in density 501Ͳ800ft 3 'LQLQJ+DOO to the north of the project site includ- 801ftͲ1/4Mile 2 ing the K-State Agriculture, Horticulture >1/4Mile 1 and Veterinary Medicine buildings and CampusCreekBuffer 25% K-State Farmland beyond. The Derby Residence Hall Complex resides on the DistanceFromCreekCenterline eastern boarder of campus adjacent 0Ͳ75ft 1 to Manhattan Avenue and residential >75ft 5 neighborhoods. SlopeAspect 30% SunQuadrants The site topography is characterized by North 2 a general east to west slope with maxi- East 3 mum existing slopes in certain areas of South 5 39.5%. The maximum elevation change West 4 across the site is 27 feet with an eleva- Soils 15% tion of 1064 feet at the residence hall plaza surrounded by Moore and West OrganicMaterialContent Hall and 1037 feet at the lowest point of 4.50% 5 Campus Creek on the project site (See 3.50% 4 8QGHUXWLOL]HG6SDFHXWLOL]H Figure 4.4). 3.00% 3 2.50% 2 ,QYDVLYH6SHFLHVSHFL Campus Creek fl ows from northwest to 2.00% 1 southeast through the site and is the *InSuitabilityRatingSystem,5ismostsuitableand1isleastsuitable only natural surface water source. The residence hall plaza drains to its center and outlets in a grassy area to the northwest. Some runoff occurs from Table 4.1|Suitability Analysis Calculations Figure 4.3|Site Location N one of the existing parking lots imme- Each factor had ranges that were ranked based on suitability for a permaculture garden The site was chosen between the Derby Housing Complex and the International Student Center diately southwest of West Hall directly (table created by author). (graphic by author over a Google Maps image). onto the project site to the southwest.

30 Chapter 4| Site Selection & Analysis The Fruits of Landscape 31 Rainwater falling on the residence hall Figure 4.6|Existing Trees. buildings fl ows directly into the storm The left diagram shows all existing trees sewer system with an internal drainage (image created by author over a CAD base system. provided by KSU).

Based on a soil survey of Riley County, the site contains two diff erent soil types. “Ivan and Kennebec Silt Loam” exists in the Campus Creek corridor; while “Smolan Silt Loam” characterizes the remaining portions of the site. It was noted that this soil data refl ected regional soil conditions and did not take into account recent, site level soil amendments, contamination or deg- Figure 4.4|Existing Mature Trees radation (i.e. fi ll dirt under West Hall The site contains some large, high-quality trees (photos by author). parking lot and possible down-slope contaminations from parking lot).

Numerous underground utility lines cross the site including Storm and Sani- tary Sewer, Electric, Natural Gas, Water and TV lines (See Figure 4.4). Several garden hydrants exist in the northern portion of the site and are currently Figure 4.7|Low Quality Trees used for irrigation of temporary nursery The diagram to the left shows trees on site that trees on site. A large trash dumpster were deemed poor quality from site observation and compactor are located immediately based on heath, species type and location southwest of Moore Hall. In addition, (image created by author over a CAD base provided by KSU). Garbage recycling bins are currently located on Dumpster the periphery of the central plaza space Basketball on the west side of Derby dining hall. Courts

Recycling Bins Alcove Sitting Area The site contains a variety of trees in regard to age, quality, and species. Exemplary of existing tree species are three large American Lindens directly east of the International Student Center and a large, mature Sycamore just south of the same building. The site exhibits numerous clumps of invasive Figure 4.5|Existing Invasive Honeysuckle Japanese Honeysuckle and White Mul- Japanese Honeysuckle is firmly established in several overgrown areas on site (photo by author). berry. Several Siberian Elms border the eastern edge of the site.

32 Chapter 4| Site Selection & Analysis The Fruits of Landscape 33 Currently the site is used for very little more than a temporary location for nursery trees and a walk through space. A rain-garden exists adjacent to the International Student Center court yard capturing water off the building roof.

Concerning future use and planning for the site, the Kansas State Master Plan Update Task Force recently put together two master plans for the campus. In the 2012 KSU Master Plan Figure 4.8|Existing Hydrants Figure 4.11|Outlet Below Derby the site exhibits park-like characteris- Photo by author. Plaza. Photo by author. tics with several major circulation paths proposed (See Figure 4.16). Additional square footage is proposed for the International Student Center. Another version of the 2012 plan was created specifi cally for K-State Housing and Din- ing in January of 2013 (See Figure 4.17). This plan indicates massive expansions to the Derby residential complex with three new residence halls proposed within the project boundaries.

It was determined that this project Figure 4.9|Existing Parking Lot Figure 4.12|Trash Compactor would refl ect the campus development Photo by author. Photo by author. scenarios indicated in the fi rst of the two proposed master plans, in order to preserve valuable tree specimens, eff ectively respond to the current channelized state of Campus Creek and given the opportunity for food produc- tion adjacent to K-State’s largest dining hall. As seen in the next chapter the fi nal design plan refl ects sensitivity to existing mature trees, the Interational Student Center rain-garden and the ecological health of Campus Creek. The proposed Master Plan for K-State Figure 4.14|Existing Conditions Summary Scale: 1 in = 90 feet N Housing and Dining undermines all of Figure 4.10|Sewer Manhole Figure 4.13|Recycle Bins The above map is a summary of the major existing site conditions these goals. The 2012 KSU Master Plan Photo by author. Photo by author. (Image adapted from KSU-provided base information). 0’ 45’ 90’ displays a less intrusive program for

34 Chapter 4| Site Selection & Analysis The Fruits of Landscape 35 this site including only an expansion on the south side of the International Student Center building. As shown in the fi nal design plan it was determined that, in order to preserve an valuable, mature Sycamore tree, the expansion should occur on the north side of the building on less ecologically valuable real estate. Opportunities Several opportunities were determined concerning management. The roofs of Moore and West Hall cur- rently capture relatively clean water across nearly 27,000 square feet. It was found that this water could be harvest- ed and used to irrigate proposed food production beds on site. In addition, it was discovered that since the build- ings are both over 60 feet high, the potential exists for gravity fed irrigation through the implementation of rain water cistern towers. Opportunities exist for stormwater management in the restoration of campus creek as well. Ample space was observed on site for the expansion of the Campus Creek channel in creating an adjacent wetland.

Existing mature trees on site were iden- tifi ed as valuable assets to the design. In subsequent design iterations the value of several large, high-quality trees were assessed in regard to the creation of desirable experience throughout the site and guiding circulation patterns (See Figure 4.4).

Figure 4.15|Existing Site Character The site exhibits under-utilized space , steep slopes , and mature trees (photos by author).

36 Chapter 4| Site Selection & Analysis The Fruits of Landscape 37 Constraints Summary Several project constraints were identi- In summary, the location of the project fi ed based on the existing conditions of site was chosen for its suitability for the site. It was noted that since one of permaculture strategies. Site condi- the major components of this project is tions and issues included under-utilized food production there is a requirement space, invasive species, a diverse array for unhindered solar access to the fruit of tree cover and quality, steep slopes, and vegetable plants for optimum potential utility constraints, soil qual- productivity. The site contains a signifi - ity issues, and general future design cant amount of tree canopy cover with concepts from the K-State Master Plan. some trees (as mentioned previously) It was observed that the site off ers being large, mature and of high quality opportunities for this project type in (See Figure 4.12). Thus, to some degree, regard to stormwater harvesting, tree design decisions were constrained to preservation, and historic continuity. preliminary assessments of tree value. The design process took into consider- ation these conditions and site issues Sanitary sewer line and other util- by carefully responding to the major ity lines pose issues in terms of the Figure 4.16|2012 K-State Master Plan site concerns in all design iterations. Figure 4.18|International Student Center Rain-Garden Plantings feasibility of relocating them due to The above diagram shows the KSU Master Plan update without the Housing The rain-garden currently serves an ecological function by accelerating the infiltration and transpira- design interventions. In particular, the & Dining Expansion Component. Image provided by KSU. tion of water run-off from the International Student Center roof (photo courtesy of Lee Skabelund). storm sewer pipe line buried along the eastern edge of campus creek as noted in plan was noted as a constraint to cer- tain types of stream restoration (such as creating a wetland by expanding the east bank).

Existing site parking lots are constraints in terms of soil quality underneath and around them. Both versions of the K- State Master Plan propose the removal of both the northern and southern parking lots. However, it was acknowl- edged that signifi cant soil amendments may need to occur in those locations for future vegetation growth (espe- cially food production).

Figure 4.17|2013 K-State Housing & Dining Master Plan KSU Housing & Dining Master Plan proposes new residence halls with little Figure 4.19|International Student Center Rain-Garden regard for existing high quality trees (image provided by KSU). The rain-garden provides an engaging space next to a mature spreading Sycamore (Photo courtesy of Lee Skabelund).

38 Chapter 4| Site Selection & Analysis The Fruits of Landscape 39 Design Process5

40 Chapter 4| Site Selection & Analysis he primary method in exploring and modeling ecological systems and Iteration 1 Iteration 2 the project thesis was design. processes (Lyle 1994; Mollison 1990; TThe design process was used to Holmgren 2011; Jacke 2005; Hemenway apply concepts regarding the creation 2009). Concepts From Literature of meaningful experiences through l Des - Regenerative Agriculture - Context Congruency ina ign landscape to the chosen K-State Cyclical Food Production System - Creative assembly of familiar F campus site in order that concepts in - Resource Efficiency and parts Minimization of Waste - Didactic landscape sustainable food production would be Iteration 1 – Sustainable - Modeling Ecological Systems and - Perception of Ecological promoted through these experiences Processes Landscapes created by the landscape (See Figure Food Production In Iteration 1 the site was divided into Strategies from Literature Sythesis 5.1). Thus, sustainable food production 1 & 2 Synthesis zones based on proximity to the Derby - Water Harvesting and Management was the message and basic arrange- - Soil Regeneration and Fertility Dining Hall. Areas in the site design ments of landscape form and space Maintenance that required more maintenance such - Maximizing the Edge were used as the medium through (Natural Circulation Patterns and Forms) as vegetable gardens are located close which the message was intended to be - Exhibited Guild Plantings to Derby while areas that are designed - Didactic Terracing conveyed. By exploring the sustainable - Integration of Natural Bed Patterns in to require less maintenance such food food production as implemented in this Public Circulation Routes forest guilds are located farther from - Re-representation of Historic Ag. Village particular landscape at K-State and the - Educational Signage Derby. medium of landscape form and space, - Consideration of K-State Master Plan the intent was for concepts to emerge Regenerative Agriculture was identifi ed through the process of design. as that system of food production that Resulting Design Elements not only sustains itself, but becomes These concepts showed the potential more productive, rich, and effi cient - Site Circulation Enhancement for integration of sustainable food Resulting Design Elements - Campus creek Restorative Wetland over time (John Lyle 1995). Referring - Response to 2012 KSU Master Plan production with the experiential power - Roof Water Harvesting - Site Circulation Enhancement - Native Prairie back to the list of characteristics under - High-Tunnel Beds - Residential/Academic Transition of landscape form and space. It was - Spiral Vegetable bed which John Lyle organizes regenera- - Terraced - Campus Creek Restorative - Preservation of High Quality Trees anticipated that by this exercise, ways - Preservation of Mature Trees Wetland - Bee Hives tive systems, regenerative agriculture - Campus Creek Restorative - Central Learning Space of promoting sustainable food pro- - Water Harvesting exhibits diversity, combination of Wetland - Preservation of Mature Trees - Daidatic Orchard Terraces duction through designed landscape - Wood Construction Work Area - Planting Repetition - Wetland Board Walk functions, storage management, - Mushroom Cultivation - Relocation of Existing Parking Lot would emerge. The design iterations - High Tunnel Beds and connections between form and - Bee Hives - Extermination of Invasives - Material Vocabulary in Overhead Structures were short, conceptualizations of ideas - Relocation of Existing Parking Lot - Park-like setting process. One example of regenerative - Social Plaza Space drawn from the literature. They both *Consistencies - Vintage Style Utility Building agriculture is a plant guild (Hemenway - Central Learning Space illustrated preliminary site program and 2009, 192; Mars 2005, 62; Jacke 2005, layout. 121). Toby Hemenway defi nes a guild as *Consistencies Iteration 1 – Sustainable Food Produc- “a group of plants and animals har- *Elements Introduced tion – incorporated a list of sustainable moniously interwoven into a pattern strategies commonly used in organic of mutual support, often centered farming and permaculture (See Figure around one major species, that ben- 5.1). In this iteration, general concepts efi ts humans while creating habitat Figure 5.1|Design Process Diagram from the literature included the ideas (Hemenway 2000, 183).” In this kind The design process uses strategies drawn from the literature to inform two preliminary design itera- of regenerative agriculture, cyclical of regenerative system resources are tions. These iterations explore two distinct concepts. The final design is a synthesis of the previous food production systems, resource distributed and recycled, organic mate- iterations, utilizing the effectiveness of both in influencing the observer and regenerating the environ- effi ciency, minimization of waste, rial is built up, and plants benefi t from ment through food production (diagram by author).

42 Chapter 5| Design Process The Fruits of Landscape 43 B B’

Figure 5.2|Iteration 1: Section A-A’ looking northwest Vertical Exaggeration x2 (drawing by author).

0’ 15’ 30’ 60’

A’

A

Figure 5.3|Iteration 1: Section B-B’ looking south. Figure 5.4|Iteration 1 - Sustainable Food Production Scale: 1 in = 90 feet N Vertical Exaggeration x2 (drawing by author). The site is laid out with particular regard for slope and water runoff (drawing by author). 0’ 45’ 90’

0’ 15’ 30’ 60’

44 Chapter 5| Design Process The Fruits of Landscape 45 each other. Resources aren’t just taken ing fertility and species richness (See Preliminary ideas for soil management from the soil by food producing plants. Figure 5.6). Using Slope for and fertility maintenance involved Other plants, whose primary functions Orchard Irrigation the implementation of plant guilds, are not food production, provide the Creation of habitat for pollinators and soil organism cultivation, decreasing composition with ecological function other benefi cial animals and insects opportunity for soil compaction, and to bring nutrients back into the cycle. was another concept explored in mulch protection (Edible Forest Gardens A balance occurs between production Iteration 1. Two design elements in this Orchard Fruit p. 75, The Basics of Permaculture Design and regeneration such that resources iteration off er specifi c habitat for ben- p. 51, Gaia’s Garden p. 71). As noted in are not depleted, but maintained and efi cial species. Honey Bee hives were chapter 4, there are a few specifi c areas increased. proposed in an accessible yet protected Vegetable Beds with High Tunnels on site that require soil rebuilding. location to encourage pollination of Preservation of Derbby These areas are located on the south- Mature Trees Vegetable Produce There are various strategies along with vegetable and fruit producers on site. Diningn Halall ern and northern portions of the site plant guilds that include the modeling While addressing stream contamina- were the design proposes the removal of ecological systems and processes. tion and stability issues, the wetland or of existing parking lots. Sheet mulching Though the composition of plant guilds “wet-meadow” extension of Campus will be employed to mitigate poor soil are created outside the normal eco- Creek off ers another realm of habitat quality and to jump-start preliminary logical process of nature, guilds are for desirable insects. Released Pressure on Channelized Orchard Fruilt Campus Creek plan growth. intended to mimic functions in natural ecosystems. This strategy is consistent Iteration 1 also developed on the prem- Wetland with John Lyle’s fi rst principle on regen- ise of effi cient use of resources and the erative systems: “Considering nature minimization of waste. In food produc- Iteration 2 – Landscape as both model and context.” Other tion, the primary resources include Terraced Orchard strategies such as maximizing edge water, air, sunlight, and soil nutrients. Influence area and on site pollination systems are Sunlight and air are less controllable Iteration 2 – Landscape Infl uence – was than water and soil nutrients. Manage- Using Slope for focused on the basic formal and spatial techniques explored in iteration 1. Orchard Irrigation ment of sunlight included strategies to elements of landscape and the power Maximizing the edge of planting beds avoid shaded areas for planted veg- they have in infl uencing the observer to in the garden is a strategy that gains etable beds and high-tunnel structures Figure 5.6|Iteration 1 Design Elements notice and experience certain concepts Iteration 2 uses existing site topography to layout the orientation of food production beds and from the natural of ecosys- to extend the growing season. Increas- orchards. All food production areas are oriented around Derby Dining Hall. Existing mature trees are (See Figures 5.7, 8, 9). The conceptual tem edges (Hemenway 2000, 96; Edible ing the effi cient use of nutrients found preserved. A wetland is proposed to expand the Campus Creek channel (diagram by author). design proposes the use of circulation Forest Gardens, The Basics of Permacul- in the air depends on the type of plants as the driver for directing the user’s ture Design p. 84, Permaculture p. 152, in the garden, the spacing and the site attention and focus. Basic design ele- 336, 413). These areas in an ecosystem terrain. Water and soil, however, can be Pollination and Honey Production ments in this iteration included entry, often referred to as ecotones are ex- highly and meticulously managed. tangential views, repetition, directional tremely fertile due to the accumulation views, framing, and creating a transi- of organic material, species diversity, Water harvesting and management Figure 5.5|Site Food Production tion zone (See Figure 5.10). access to sunlight, and the shared nu- was vital in the development of itera- Site food production areas include terraced an- trients of two ecosystems (Mars 1996, tion 1. Capturing and managing site nual beds, high tunnels, terraced orchard guilds, The above design strategies arose from and honey production (enlargements by author). 10). Iteration 1 explored this concept water resources involved strategies the following concepts derived from by implementing curvilinear beds with such as terracing, cisterns, and wetland the literature: context congruency, smaller widths surrounded by paths. In creation (Hemenway 2009, 96; Jacke creative assembly of familiar parts, di- this way the edge space in the planting 2005; Mars 2005, 84; Mollison 1990, dactic landscapes, perceivable ecology scheme was increased, thus promot- 152, 336, 413). in landscape, and types of circulation (approach, entrance, and path-space

46 Chapter 5| Design Process The Fruits of Landscape 47 B B’

Figure 5.7|Iteration 2: Section A-A’ looking northwest Vertical Exaggeration x2 (drawing by author).

A’

A

Figure 5.8|Iteration 2: Section B-B’ looking south Figure 5.9|Iteration 2: Landscape Influence Scale: 1 in = 90 feet N Vertical Exaggeration x2 (drawing by author). Iteration 2 explored the concepts from the literature regarding landscape influence. Circulation was spe- cifically explored as a mode of direction for the occupants of the site in regard to views and experience 0’ 45’ 90’ (drawing by author).

48 Chapter 5| Design Process The Fruits of Landscape 49 relationships) (Refer to Figure 2.10). essentially the same as was expressed parts promotes an experience involving Authors describing these basic ele- above, and can be physical, theoretical, the integral parts of the site. ments of landscape infl uence discuss historical, and cultural. In terms of the Entrance fundamental arrangements of form and K-State campus, there is a historical The agenda of the above-mentioned space, how the perception of sustain- context of agriculture associated with re-assemblage was didactic in exploring ability is improved, how landscapes the university enforcing the appropri- landscape infl uence. Shaping views and become meaningful, and how meaning ateness of food production on campus. experience through site circulation has is expressed through landscape design. This was identifi ed as a context that the the potential of conveying a message promotion of sustainable food produc- to the occupant. As we see in the fi nal Iteration 2 explored the concept of tion should tap into. Residential to design, food production is the focal Accademic Transition context congruency discovered in the Exhibition point of didactic site elements. literature. Creating a meaningful ex- As noted in chapter 2, Laurie Olin perience through context congruency discusses the concept of re-assembling refl ects back to Francis Ching’s ac- familiar parts in creating something knowledgement of a design context as new and meaningful (Olin 1995). Synthesis and Revision well as Mark Treib’s description of the Changes in scale, spatial relationship,

R Process “Vernacular Landscape” in his article, and function in certain design elements e p e The fi rst two iterations were con- ti “Must Landscapes Mean?: Approaches can lead to an entirely diff erent experi- ti on ducted with lists of concepts distinct to Signifi cance in Recent Landscape ence. In iteration 2, paths traverse the from one another in order to allow the Architecture” (Francis Ching, Mark site in curvilinear, indirect patterns. An eff ective elements of each iteration to Treib). Treib defi nes the Vernacular amphitheater was centrally located to complement one another in the fi nal Landscape as follows: “The vernacular provide a programmatic element that synthesis of the two. The resulting de- is a rich source of materials and forms; signals the transition from residential Entrance sign concepts were brought together, after all, it constitutes the “real” world space to academic space. In addition, Tangential undergoing revisions and refi nement in which we dwell (Treib 1993, 52).” mature trees are preserved and a Views (See Figures 5.11, 12). The results includ- Treib describes this type of landscape wetland extension of Campus Creek is ed a fi nal design based on this iterative as one that is connected to the context proposed similar to the fi rst iteration. process from which fi nal concepts and in terms of materials and forms. The Figure 5.10|Basic Elements of Landscape Influence design details emerged. The synthesis buildings at K-State have a material Paths and amphitheaters are familiar The elements of landscape influence present in iteration 2 are directing view from site paths, framing views, guiding repetition, and site entrances (diagram by author). of the results from iteration 1 and 2 style of limestone construction and a elements of landscape architecture. showed how this space on the K-State history built upon education in agricul- However, the amphitheater in iteration campus can enlighten student and ture. This is one of the concepts driving 2 resides within the network of paths other users to the reality of a regenera- iteration 2. such that users are directed toward this space of learning rather than tive food production system. In speaking of strictly architectural proj- given the easiest “point A to point B” The design process involved a revision ects Francis Ching in Architecture: Form, path across the site (See Figure 5.10). process after iteration 1 and 2 that Space, and Order expresses the idea of Users’ attentions are directed to the focused on the combination of design context as something that encompass- wetland, the amphitheater, the existing ideas from “Sustainable Food Produc- es and illuminates the design details , and the mature trees the tion” and “Landscape Infl uence.” As within (Ching 2007, XIII). The general- design preserves through a series of shown in Figures 5.11, 12 the preliminary ity with which he depicts this concept designed entrances, approaches and site plan syntheses of Iterations 1 and promotes the application of the idea of spatial relationships along the paths. 2 involved both a combination of site context to landscape architecture proj- This simple re-assemblage of familiar ects. The context of a landscape means

50 Chapter 5| Design Process The Fruits of Landscape 51 strategies and programmatic elements as well as circulation pattern layout Iteration 1 and site confi guration. Combinations manifested themselves in the following ways: didactic terraced orchards, cen- tral garden learning space, direction of view toward sustainable site functions, integration of vernacular elements Iteration 2 with sustainable food production, and immersion of observers in sustainable food production and site ecology. Fur- ther design revisions were conducted in producing the fi nal design discussed in chapter 6 (See Figure 5.13). Synthesis

Revisions

Revisions Figure 5.11|Preliminary Design Synthesis Figure 5.12|Revision of Preliminary Design Synthesis Iterations 1 and 2 were synthesized to create a new concept The new concept was further refined, especially in terms of layout and design details (drawing by author). (drawing by author).

Final Design

Figure 5.13|Design Process Flow The project built on each design iteration emphasizing sustainable food production and artful landscape influence. Iterations 1 and 2 were synthesized in a third design plan to mesh concepts from each in the same layout. The final design resulted after various revisions.

52 Chapter 5| Design Process The Fruits of Landscape 53 Results6

54 Chapter 5| Design Process n the previous chapter, the design process was discussed as iterations I1 and 2 were developed, synthesized and revised (See Figure 6.1). This chap- ter describes the fi nal design showing how the design process has accom- plished the preliminary project inten- Prairie Savanna Terraced Apple tions. The fi nal design shows strengths International Student Guilds and weaknesses in the approach used Center Expansion in discovering the power of landscape architecture in presenting sustainable CisternnT Tower food production on the K-State Campus CeCCene traralLl Leaearea ninnniing ResReesidential Plaza Spapaacece Design Structure C A’ There are several fundamental design a m moves infl uencing the layout of the p A fi nal site plan shown in Figure 6.2. De- u Spiral Production s Bed sired site circulation, existing topogra- Upper Production phy and the position of adjacent build- C Bed r ings and valuable mature trees were e CisCiCi tertet nnT Towoower major factors in the composition of the e fi nal overall layout. The site employs a k major circulation path traversing the WetWWee -Me-MMeMeadoadodow site roughly northwest to southeast. Arranged in relation to this central ele- ment are three outer regions around a central node of activity. These region’s physical positions in relation to one Wetland another and the site correlate to the intensity of their function as well. The outer regions exhibit lower intensity Terraced Apple/ B’ sustainable functions and food produc- Pear Guilds tion than that of the center. Referring back to the “Zone Theory” discussed in chapter 5, the design assumes Derby Dining Hall as the project center. Thus, the site is organized with landscapes B with higher intensity food production Figure 6.1|Link from Iterations to Final Design and maintenance located closer to Iteration 1 and 2 explored separate intentions that were synthe- Derby while lower intensity landscapes sized in the final site design (drawings by author) . are located farther away. Figure 6.2|Final Design Site Plan Scale: 1 in = 90 feet N The site plan resulting from the process displays the combination of sustainable food production with basic elements of landscape form and space (image by author). 0’ 45’ 90’

56 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 57 The site program includes: the restor- the overhead structures as well as the ative wetland and wet-meadow, the proposed building, water towers, and native prairie savanna, vegetable and amphitheater. These material elements fruit production beds, a central learn- place the site in its familiar and reason- ing space, social and residential plaza able context. K-State is still very much spaces, terraced orchard gardens, an agricultural university. A short trip meandering paths, and uniform site a few miles north of the campus will entrances (refer to Figure 6.2). The illuminate that fact. The site, with its site responds programmatically and focus on food production, connects spatially to the existing site topogra- with the agricultural values and history phy as well as the locations of existing while promoting sustainability in food mature trees. The selection of these production. programmatic elements shows a level integration between spatial uses, pro- The site design is also sensitive toward moting the confrontation of site users the immediate physical context. Buff er with sustainable food production. For space is provided between the residen- example, locating social and residential tial area around Derby Dining Hall and plaza spaces beside areas of organic the Upper Food Production bed. The and sustainable food production within sight rapidly transitions from residential a small three and a half acre site forces to learning space with a slight blending the blending of cultural experiences. of the two around the proposed social Areas for social activity are mixed plaza (refer to Figure 6.2). with the presence of food production. The second conceptual means of infl u- Inversely, food-growing is integrated ence in this proposed landscape is in with social activity within a university the creative assembly of familiar parts. campus culture and setting. The design assembles paths, open lawn, gardens, topography, amphithe- Landscape Influence ater and plaza space. The assembly of Stemming from concepts discussed in these elements promotes the integra- iteration two of the previous chapter, tion of food production into the circula- the fi nal site design exhibits several tion and formal spaces of the site. The means of landscape infl uence. As noted food production gardens are located above these conceptual means include adjacent to the amphitheater and the context congruency, creative assembly site’s two social plaza spaces. Major of familiar parts, perceivable sustain- circulation routes exist through and ability, and didactic landscape. adjacent to the gardens. Axial relation- ships are present between elements The fi nal site plan explores several in this central region of the site and ways of becoming congruent with its paths to this area (See Figure 6.4). This context. The fi rst has to do with the idea of physical integration of spaces historical context. An appeal is made to Figure 6.3|Entry merges the activities of everyday life Entrances to the site are located on the north, south and east sides. Each is marked by an overhead structure K-State’s agricultural history through with the activity of sustainable food that gives the occupant a greater awareness of the landscape beyond (image by author). the use of native materials (i.e. lime- production. stone, steel, and wood timbers), in

58 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 59 The pedestrian paths traversing the site are curvilinear in form. This curvature, as discussed in chapter 2, promotes the opportunity for tangential views to spaces in the landscape with visual relationships to the path. Several of these tangential views have been cre- ated intentionally on site to focus the viewer’s attention on site elements including the wetland and wet-meadow and the spiral bed (See Figure 6.5).

Another aspect of landscape infl uence in this design involves Joan Nassauer and Robert Thayer’s concept of making sustainable landscapes perceivable and improving perception and appreciation. The prairie savanna on the northern area of the site exhibits an edge that is off set from peripheral paths (See Figure 6.6). This marginal space will be mown turf while the prairie grass will rise taller. This gives, as Nassauer puts it, a “cue to care.” The observer will recognize the care of a mown lawn and a maintained edge, thus infl uencing their perception of the prairie itself. View This cue gives the observer assurance that the tall grassy area has a purpose Vieww and is meant to be there. Similar strate- gies are present in the proposed wet- land, wet-meadow, and apple guilds. A strong edge is established with the modular stone retaining wall along the proposed wetland and mown turf partway up the slope along the apple guilds. View

In making this landscape didactic, the design proposes the concept of emer- Figure 6.4|Axial Approach and Learning Space Integration Figure 6.5|Views through Path-Space Relationships Figure 6.6|Perceiving Intentional Ecology sion and education. Site paths fl ow The site organized three outer areas around a central intensive learning and production space along The bend in the path away from the wetland creates a moment where the Mown strip along the native Prairie Savanna communicates to the observer through or along ecologically function- the major pedestrian corridor (image & diagram by author). viewer’s focus is placed on the wetland (image & diagram by author). that the prairie is intentional and managed (image & diagram by author). ing site elements (i.e. the production

60 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 61 gardens, the prairie savanna, and the and management occurs on site in sev- wetland/wet-meadow). Educational eral specifi c ways. Rain water falling on signage is positioned in three locations the roofs of Moore and West residence along pathways to inform the observer halls is captured in two storage towers of the ecological functions that are tak- adjacent to each building (See Figure ing place. 6.9). Water that falls on the roof drains into each tower. When full the towers Materials & Technologies overfl ow through a pipe directing the The fi nal design incorporates a mate- excess water to the nearby orchard ter- rial pallet that responds to some of the races. Surface water run-off from areas more recent projects on campus such above the terraces is also collected to as the new Leadership Studies Build- irrigate the apple guilds along the top ing, new campus Kiosks, and improved of the terraces. Treated Wood Planks Limestone Masonry Pillars Black Painted Steel wood seating. These material consis- The water harvested from the roofs tencies occur in the construction of the of Moore and West Hall is used to ir- overhead structures proposed at site rigate the upper and spiral production entrances and the stage area of the beds. These beds will be equipped with central learning space amphitheater drip-line irrigation. Table 6.2 describes (See Figure 6.7). Limestone masonry the process by which the towers were provides an visually solid base to sized. Tower sizing was based on each pillar in the overhead structures. the amount of water required by the Concrete-fi lled black painted steel piers production beds (.62 gallons/s.f./week) rise 14.5’ high supporting the cantile- as well as the average monthly rainfall vered lattice structure. Highly fi nished during the growing season for this and treated planks extend horizontally region of the country (Markham 2010). supported by cables attached to the It was determined that each tower top of the piers and by angular steel needed to be approximately 13,000 braces underneath. These planks gallons in order to store one month’s serve as the skeleton for the overhead worth of average rainfall (3 inches lattice providing a mottled shade for of rain). For example, if the garden the space below. Other site features received a 1.86 inch rainfall on the fi rst include similar material composition. of the month, garden could rely entirely The utility building will be constructed on the towers to provide more than with limestone masonry walls. The wall suffi cient irrigation for the rest of the around the Upper Production bed is month give the irrigation requirement also proposed as limestone masonry. of .62 gallons per square foot per week. Finally, the two cisterns (discussed be- low) are constructed with a limestone masonry veneer with black painted Site Prep & Maintenance steel bands, downspouts and overfl ow Certain strategies in preparing the site piping (See Figure 6.8). for intensive sustainable food produc- Figure 6.7|Stage and Entrance Structures tion are proposed as well as longer Overhead structures on the edges of the site as well as internally frame elements of sustainable ecological function in The design also, exhibits water man- term maintenance plan. The vegetable the design. The materiality of these overhead structures connects the design with the campus aesthetic using lime- agement techniques. Water harvesting and fruit production beds will require stone, black painted steel, and high-quality wood planking (photos and drawing by author).

62 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 63 optimal soil conditions at the outset for Moore Roof Area (s.f.) 14370.41 Overfl ow the garden to get established. Sheet West Roof Area (s.f.) 12414.33 Tower mulching is a technology that involves Downspout From Roof Total Area (s.f.) 26784.74 Masonry the layering of organic material that Articulation AnnualGrowingͲSeason Average/Month Hydrant are implemented on top of existing site Manhattan Average Rainfall 34.83.72125 soils or turf. The process involves aerat- A x R / 12 = W cubic feet ing the existing surface, layering the Gallons of Water Harvested (Moore Hall)  312,556.4  33,422.4 area with 6 inches of organic , Gallons of Water Harvested (West Hall)  270,011.7  28,873.0 a weed barrier layer of cardboard or Total Harvest Potential  582,568.1  62,295.4 straw and then a layer of wood chip Upper Bed Spiral Bed Total mulch (See Figure 6.10). After the layer- Planting Bed Area (s.f.)  7,361.58 2859.7826 10,221.36 ing is complete the site must lay undis- Water Requirement per (s.f.)/week (Markham 2010)  0.62 Hydrant turbed for a season (usually over the Weekly Water Requirement 4,564.18 1,773.07 6,337.24 winter) to allow for the breakdown of Monthly Water Requirement 18,256.72 7,092.26 25,348.98 the organic layers. After this period the Annual Water Requirement 237,337.34 92,199.39 329,536.73 resulting grow medium will be ready Hydrant for planting. This process combats com- Overfl ow Pipe to Assumed Monthly Rainfall (in) 3 Tower pacted or unbalanced soil conditions Terraced Apple Moore Hall Monthly Harvest Potential (gal) 26,944.5 Overfl ow that may be present on site. Guilds West Hall Monthly Harvest Potential (gal) 23,276.9

In addition, as noted in chapter 4, Table 6.1|Cistern Capacity Calculations: Figure 6.9|Water Tower Locations preparation of the site for design Cistern size is based on a maximum holding capacity for a 3.72 inch rainfall event . This allows The water towers are located just east of the Up- implementation will involve removal the harvest potential of the roof of Moore Hall to provide water for a little over one month of irriga- per Production Bed. They irrigate the vegetable of invasive species. These will include tion requirements for both planting beds (25,348.98 gallons). beds to the west and when overflowing outlet to the orchard terraces. primarily Japanese Honeysuckle and Black Steel Band Siberian Elm. Both of these species have a tendency to establish and grow very rapidly with strong root systems that are hard to eradicate. Complete Limestone Veneer removal of invasive species will require 4 inches of Straw or Wood initial removal of plants, stumps and Chip Mulch roots, as well as a long term monitoring Cardboard Layer and maintenance of susceptible areas in the design. These areas include the 6 inches of Compost wetland and wet-meadow, the prairie Seating savanna and the fruit guilds and pro- duction beds. Areas that are not desig- Existing Soil nated as mown turf grass will be prone to the reestablishment of these inva- sive species and will require consistent weeding. Annual or biannual controlled burns is a management tool that should be used on the prairie savanna. Regular Figure 6.8|Water Tower Detail Figure 6.10|Sheet Mulching burning of this area will enrich the soil The water towers capture and store roof runoff providing 1 month’s worth of irrigation with a 1.86 Production beds will be mulched with layers of compost, cardboard, and straw or wood chips. Sheet inch rainfall event. Both Towers are approximately 34.5 feet high (detail by author). mulching will occur were the primary food production bed are proposed.

64 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 65 and prevent woody invasive species tors, and weed feeders, both spe- from getting reestablished. cifi cally attractive plant species and appropriate habitat are implemented To ensure the long-term viability of this on-site. The prairie savanna, wetland/ project, it is imperative that a full-time wet-meadow and designated insectary faculty and/or staff position be created plantings in the orchard guilds and for the management of the site food the upper production bed all contain production and ecological functions. plants that attract benefi cial insects to Hiring a certifi ed permaculturalist in accomplish these functions. A sample conjunction with the horticulture or of these types of species can be seen natural resources and environmental in the plant list of the insectary areas studies programs could become a in the Upper Production Bed as well as specialized extension of the curriculum. the apple guilds (see Figure 6.13, 15). In addition, student internships would The insectary in the Upper Production provide incentive for using the educa- Bed and other insect attracting plants tional benefi ts the site provides and are essential for the health and produc- would further ensure the long-term tivity of these gardens since over 50% maintenance and productivity of the of the vegetables and fruit grown need site’s ecological functions. to be pollinated by insects. All of these areas provide, sheltered, and climate Food Production controlled habitat for spiders, beetles The site design proposes the attraction and other predator insects. Plant spe- of benefi cial insects for pollination and cies that attract native pollinators as pest predation. Insects are integral in well as a node for honey bee hives are the health and productivity of a food proposed to promote this vital func- garden and any other ecologically fl our- tion in plant productivity. Honey bees, ishing landscape. Toby Hemenway in though not native to the U.S., are excel- Gaia’s Garden claims, “Without insects, lent pollinators given their propensity there would be very little for us to eat, to pollinate a wide variety of fl owering no compost or topsoil, few birds, fewer plant species instead of select few. mammals – they’re an essential, major Their value for pollination as well as thread in the web of life (Hemenway their honey production ability makes 2000, 151). Hemenway identifi es four them a well advised addition to any types of benefi cial insects that healthily food production operation. functioning ecological gardens should attract: predators, parasitic insects, The fi nal design proposes four main pollinators, and weed feeders (Hemen- areas of fruit and vegetable production: way 2000, 153). These insects provide the upper production bed, the spiral a balance that suppresses blooms of bed, and the northern and southern harmful and destructive plants and terraced fruit tree guilds. These areas other insects. of food production exhibit various sus- Figure 6.11|Juxtaposition and Recombination tainable food production techniques at The site design integrates sustainable food production with learning and social space using topography and circulation. In order to attract this conglomeration varying degrees of intensity. of predators, parasitic insects, pollina-

66 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 67 Central Learning Space Moore Hall Cistern Guild Center Roxbury Russet High Tunnel Structure Perennial/Annual Planted Rows ‘Liberty’ Kiwi/Cucumber Trellis Upper Production Bed Insectary Amphitheater Seating Stage Overhead Structure Gathering Space

Entrance Structure A A’

Limestone Masonry Wall Grass Suppressing Species Keyhole Bed Mulch Species daffodils Spiral Production nasturtium Bed irises West Hall Cistern rubarb Gathering Space Entrance Structure Insectary Species Pest Predator Habitat aster logs beebalm boulders blazing star Social Plaza wild indigo Apple Centered Guilds Apple Centered Guilds goldenrod lobelia Pear Centered Guilds milkweed new jersey tea prairie clover purple conefl ower Nutrient Accumulators Figure 6.12 |Productive Central Learning Space steeplebush false indigo The Central Learning Space’s major elements includes the Upper Bed, the Spiral Bed, an amphitheater comfrey for outdoor classes, two peripheral orchards to the north and south and rainwater cisterns (images Figure 6.13|Apple Guild Scheme nasturtium by author). Plant Species are planted in beneficial relationships in order to achieve long-term productivity and regeneration (drawing by author).

68 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 69 The upper bed form responds to the 1 Entrance Structure curvature of the central learning space rosemary to the northwest and the enclosure of nasturtium sage buffalo berry strawberries Kiwi Trellis the resident halls: Moore and West (re- High Tunnel Insectary fer to Figure 6.2). An overhead shade 2 10 structure, similar to structures at other 9 major site entry points is located at the top of the upper bed off of the plaza 11 between the residence halls. A three wild indigo blazing star aster beebalm purple cone lobelia buffaloberry garlic carrots prairie clover snap peas bell peppers lettuce cilantro lettuce snap peas parsley tomatoes basil sweet clover false indigo radishes 3 cucumbers hardy kiwi red potatoes prairie turnip broccoli/cauli foot wall is proposed surrounding the 8 majority of the upper bed to enhance 12 entrance into the garden and provide the potential for regulating pedestrian traffi c through the garden. fl ower The upper bed, illustrated in Figure 6.11, 13 contains rows of annual crops integrat- 4 ed with some nutrient accumulating pe- rennials. The two planting areas on the 14 16 Figure 6.15 |Section A-A’ - Upper Production Bed east portion of the upper bed are desig- Section A-A’ shows the planting row scheme for the upper bed exhibiting a mixture of nutrient accumulators nated for a naturalized pallet of insect 15 and annual vegetables (See section cut line in Figure 6.12). attracting plants as discussed above. In 5 ‘Roxbury Russet’ addition, a few logs and boulders are cabbage proposed in this location to provide spinach habitat for other predators that will yellow onions prey on destructive insect pests (i.e. 6 lizards and snakes). The upper produc- 7 tion bed represents the most intensive planting scheme in the design. These Figure 6.14|Spiral Bed areas of high intensity food produc- The spiral bed offers natural form and increase of edge space, while providing numbered nodes for experimentation (drawing by author). tion are accomplished by annual crops within each swath arranged based Mulch Layer on companionship. A few perennial Level Spreader species such as false indigo, prairie turnip and sweet clover are integrated within the annual plant combinations to provide consistent nitrogen fi xation. Several examples of companion plant- ing and perennial integration include the “tomato-basil” combination, garlic, lettuce and carrot planted in neighbor- Figure 6.16 |Bed Row Detail Section Perspective ing rows and perennial false indigo and The upper bed rows are slightly mounded with mulch. Lateral drains are proposed under the paths to move prairie turnip planted with broccoli and water flowing down-slope laterally decreasing erosion and maximizing water harvesting and storage (image by radishes. These combinations work author).

70 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 71 together due to complimentary root structure and nutrient requirements NumberofMeals NumberofMeals and accumulation (Hemenway 2000). PercentofMenuNeeds PercentofMenuNeeds ProvidedofMenuNeeds ProvidedofMenuNeeds The rows are laid out with the contours PlantName ProductionRate QuantityPlanted PotentialYield (AnnualAverage) (MonthlyAverage) (Mon,Feb25) (Tues,Feb26) to allow for the percolation of water Apple,Liberty(each) 1296apples/tree 7 2880 9% 103% 10.93 160.54 at each mulch path between beds (See Apple,RoxburyRusset(each) 720apples/tree 4 9072 27% 325% 34.44 505.69 Figure 6.15). Water is diverted perpen- Basil(lbs) 0.28lbs/plant 140 39.2 178% 2138% NR NR dicular to the slope to decrease erosion Broccoli(lbs) 1.3lbs/plant 66 85.8 1% 13% 5.38 42.06 potential and to capture valuable water runoff . A perforated pipe is buried 12 Cabbage(lbs) 2.5lbs/plant 33 82.5 5% 57% 15.00 NR inches below the path surface within Cantaloupe/Muskmelon(lbs) .46lbs/s.f. 312 143.52 2% 18% NR NR a layer of gravel to allow free water Carrots(lbs) 1.125lbs/s.f. 284 319.5 2% 28% 8.41 4.78 movement and fi ltration as well as Coriander/Cilantro(lbs) 0.39lbs/s.f. 132 51.48 22% 259% NR 93.60 structural stability for the path. Cucumbers(lbs) 8lbs/plant 33 264 3% 40% 66.00 24.47 The fruit tree guilds to the north and GarlicCloves(lbs) .125lbs/bulb 152 19 1508% 18095% 28.79 59.38 south of the central learning space are Kale(lbs) 5lbs/4footrow 33 165 725% 8696% NR NR composed along water-capturing ter- Kiwi,Hardy(lbs) 125lbs/vine 44 5500 408% 4898% NR NR races (refer to Figure 6.2) Water runoff Lettuce(lbs) .46lbs/s.f. 312 143 5% 56% 0.41 2.42 from the areas above these terraces Mint Ͳ ͲͲ NR NR is captured in close proximity to the guilds. Water is stored in a lens under Onions,Red/Yellow(lbs) 1.12lbs/s.f. 888 994.56 7% 82% 15.30 214.81 the terrace from which the guild above Oregano(lbs) .14lbs/s.f. 132 18.48 391% 4688% NR NR can have continued access to water Parsley(lbs) .46lbs/s.f. 132 60.72 27% 328% 43.68 1518.00 after a rain event. The northern guilds Pears(lbs) 580 4 2320 81% 975% NR 128.89 are specifi cally apple tree centered Peppers,Bell(lbs) 2lbs/plant 132 264 4% 42% 10.86 43.28 guilds, while the southern terraces ex- hibit both apple guilds and pear guilds. Potato,Red(each) 5lbs/plant 108 540 5% 57% 5.63 5.63 The planting scheme surrounding the Radishes(lbs) 10lbs/30ftrow 13.2 132 156% 1870% NR NR central fruit trees are the same in the Rosemary Ͳ ͲͲ NR NR pear and apple guilds. As shown in Fig- Sage Ͳ ͲͲ NR NR ure 6.12 and discussed in chapter 5, the SnapPeas(lbs) .23lbs/s.f. 132 30.36 7% 84% NR NR guilds include plant species off ering the Spinach(lbs) 6lbs/6ftrow 22 132 35% 420% 57.39 264.00 following functions: nutrient accumula- tion, mulching, insect attraction, grass Squash(lbs) .34lbs/s.f. 132 44.88 1% 13% 1.30 44.88 suppression, and fruit production. Strawberries(pints) 4pints/plant 320 1280 56% 675% 98.16 162.64 Tomatos(lbs) 20lbs/plant 64 1280 10% 115% 27.71 64.22 Table 6.2 and 6.3 show the analysis of Turnips(lbs) .69lb/s.f. 168 115.92 422% 5058% NR NR on-site food production potential in comparison with the menu require- Watermelon(lbs) 20lbs/plant 9 180 5% 58% NR NR ments at Derby Dining Hall. The analysis Table 6.2|Plant Production List Table 6.3|Derby Menu Requirement Comparison compares the plant list quantities and The table above shows the list of plants (chosen based on Derby’s current produce requirements), This table shows the percentage of the Derby menu requirements that are met by the plant productivity poten- productivity estimates (Table 6.2) with their rate of production, the quantity of each type planted, and the potential yield (based on production tials (table on previous page). Values are shown for annual and monthly needs as well as the menu require- the food requirements of the Derby averages). Table by author. See Appendix A. ments for two specific meals in February of 2013 (table by author).

72 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 73 Dining Hall menu in terms of annual, As mentioned in Chapter 4, two exist- of providing Derby with food items 7’ Retaining Wall 6’ Concrete Path monthly and daily needs (Table 6.3). ing sewer line resides along the eastern from the garden. Site preparation and Percentages of these requirements are bank of campus creek (See Figure 6.19). maintenance structures were discussed given for the annual and monthly menu It was discovered that the larger of the as essential parts of the project’s viabil- needs. Two example evening dinner two pipes is below the stream bed and ity. The following chapter off ers conclu- menu scenarios (February 25th & 26th thus poses no immediate obstacle for sions regarding the entire process of Evening Meals) are given to show the the proposed wetland expansion. How- this project, including lessons learned number of these kind of meals for ever, the smaller sewer line is potential and areas for further study. which the garden could provide. The buried at a depth shallow enough to be productivity estimates for each plant exposed given the proposed excava- type were derived from a variety of on- tion for the wetland. This sewer line line sources including gardening forums would have to be relocated outside the Scale: 1 in = 12 feet and organic agriculture organizations. proposed retaining wall to allow adi- These estimates were based on aver- quate space for the proposed wetland 0’ 6’ 12’ age production per unit of space or the (See Figures 6.17, 18). Existing 18” sewer line Approximate location productivity of each plant per season. It Invert: 7.5’ below of existing 8” sewer line. was acknowledge that these estimates True to the permaculture model of a Suggested relocation are subject to extreme variation region- whole systems approach to design, the of 8” sewer line. ally, seasonally, and in terms of specifi c wetland, though not directly part of Figure 6.17|Section B-B’ Wetland & Sewer site food production, plays an impor- variety or hybrid used. 8” Sanitary sewer line is moved east behind wetland retaining wall (image by author). tant role in the management of the site’s natural resources. The wetland Restorative Wetland works as a component of the whole Minor Utility Depth A wetland is proposed adjacent to by providing a fi nal catchment for site Adjustments Campus Creek, providing stability to runoff , cleaning water coming onto the the previously channelized stream, and site from upstream, and using existing provides residence time for the water moisture to create habitat for benefi - to allow contaminants to be broken cial insects as discussed above. down (See Figure 6.19). The proposed wetland is made of up of two parts the wetland and the wet-meadow. Summary The wetland is composed of species The results illustrate the integration of adapted to consistently wet conditions sustainable food production with land- where areas are frequently fl ooded. scape elements in a way that creates Species included in the wetland are an infl uential experience. Site potential A’ categorized as rushes, cat tails, sedges, for water harvesting and management and wetland grasses. The wet-meadow is projected with the discovery oppor- tunities for roof water harvesting and Relocation of plant list includes species that are A restoration of Campus Creek. Food pro- 8” SS Line adapted to long periods of dry condi- Figure 6.19|Campus Creek Existing tions in the categories of tall grasses duction potential is estimated based and forbs. These species can handle on the proposed garden layout and Figure 6.18|Utility Relocations Conditions (looking south). Sewer line relocation and minor electric and water line adjustments are proposed on site wet conditions, but are resistant to included plants. This production poten- Constructing the proposed wetland pushes the (image by author). high left bank back to provide more area for the drought (See Appendix B). tial was analyzed in comparison with the menu requirements of Derby Dining water with associated benefits (image by author). Hall in exploring the potential viability

74 Chapter 6| Results The Fruits of Landscape 75 Conclusions7

76 Chapter 6| Results fter employing strategies found sustainable thinking -- by increasing the Strategies from Literature Sythesis

in the literature on permaculture variety, freshness and interest of its - Water Harvesting and Management - Integration of Natural Bed Patterns in and organic farming, and apply- menu. - Soil Regeneration and Fertility Public Circulation Routes A Maintenance Maximizing the Edge (Natural - Re-representation of Historic Ag. Village ing strategies that enhance the expe- - Circulation Patterns and Forms) - Educational Signage rience of movement and perception Landscape Influence - Exhibited Guild Plantings - Consideration of K-State Master Plan in the landscape, several conclusions - Didactic Terracing were drawn (See Figure 7.1). Concerning the infl uence of landscape on site in promoting sustainable food First, the fi nal plan suggests that there production, the primary strategies is a potential for a positive didactic exhibited in the design focus on the experience of sustainable food pro- visual and spatial relationships and duction through the artful synthesis experiences created. The design off ers esign Ana of landscape form, particularly with D lys a resulting scenario of what it looks like st is Po regard to carefully arranged circulation to integrate sustainable food produc- patterns. These arrangements can aid tion on a university campus in a way Conclusions in presenting sustainable food produc- that promotes the value of this ap- There is potential for artful synthesis of basic arrangements of tion to the observer through struc- proach to agriculture. This concept of form and space with sustainable food production. These turing views, creating entrances and arrangements can aid in presenting sustainable food production immersion is one strategy that resulted to the observer through structuring views, creating entrances and approaches, and integrating spaces and from the design process of this project. approaches, integrating spaces and circulation paths. circulation paths. In addition, vernacular materiality is On site, there is ample opportunity for water harvesting from the mentioned as one of the ways in which roofs of Moore and West Hall. Given the average rainfall 3 inches Second, there is an opportunity for wa- per month during the growing season the harvested roof water ter harvesting and management based the site design is made congruent can support over 7,300 square feet of intensive produce beds with with K-State’s historically agricultural a 1 inch of water per week rate. This provision is made using two on the current conditions of Campus 13,000 gallon water towers. Creek and the existing roof area atop context. These strategies have the The majority of fresh produce items served at Derby Dining Hall Moore and West Hall with convenient potential to capture people’s attention and infl uence them toward a better cannot be completely provided for by the proposed intensive proximity to the site. produce garden on site. However, select non-bulk items (i.e. understanding and appreciation for Resulting Design Elements Parsley, Garlic, Basil, Kale, Radishes, Turnips, & Oregano) can be sustainable landscape functions. - Site Circulation Enhancement provided for or supplemented entirely, given the designed array of Third, it was determined through the - Campus creek Restorative Wetland produce in the proposed garden. design of the sustainable food produc- - Response to 2012 KSU Master Plan There is an opportunity for K-State Housing and Dining to tion scenario that the majority of fresh This study is limited with regard to - Native Prairie quantitative measurement of the suc- - Spiral Vegetable bed substantiate their advertising efforts increasing the variety, produce items served at Derby Dining - Preservation of High Quality Trees freshness and interest by using the fruit grown on site. Hall cannot be completely provided cess or failure of these design strate- - Bee Hives gies. A survey was not conducted to - Rain Barrel Water Harvesting for by the proposed intensive produce - Daidatic Terraced Orchard garden. However, select non-bulk illuminate how students currently - Wetland Board Walk using campus spaces are infl uenced by - High Tunnel Beds items (i.e. Parsley, Garlic, Basil, Kale, - Material Vocabulary in Overhead Structures Radishes, Turnips, & Oregano) can be landscape form and space. This project - Social Plaza would benefi t from a better under- - Vintage Style Utility Building provided for or supplemented entirely, - Central Learning Space given the designed array of produce. standing of the psyche of university campus users in regard to landscape Finally, it would appear that incorporat- elements. ing permaculture and organic farming Figure 7.1|Project Summary Diagram strategies into the campus fabric would The project conclusions are drawn from accessing the efficacy of strategies found in the literature of Site Water Management permaculture, organic farming and landscape design (diagram by author). facilitate K-State Housing and Dining’s The project also concluded that the site eff orts to promote healthy food -- and design illuminates ample opportunity

78 Chapter 7| Conclusions The Fruits of Landscape 79 for water harvesting from the roofs a lot more than what is required at In terms of food production, further connects people with the production of of Moore and West Hall. Given the Derby. Other items produce only a analysis of perennial crops versus an- their food, providing multiple opportu- average rainfall of 3 inches per month fraction of the menu need. Revisions nual crops and the integration of the nities to understand and appreciate the during the growing season the harvest- to the planting plan could allow for the two in the same area is an extension of land upon which they depend. ed roof water can support over 7,300 arrival of the garden at a more bal- the technologies explored in this study. square feet of intensive produce beds anced and effi cient planting scheme in The actual viability of perennial crops with a 1 inch of water per week rate. terms of provision for Derby’s menu. interplanted with annuals is debatable This provision is made using two 13,000 The results show clearly, however, that and the practice of it can be problem- gallon water towers. An opportunity there are certain items that Derby does atic. Perennial species off er nutritional also exists given the height of the resi- not buy and serve as much of as others. and resource stability by the way that dence halls. From a design standpoint, Solutions to this imbalance, therefore, they draw out and fi x benefi cial nu- it was appropriate for the water towers could also include both revisions to the trients in the soil and are able to tap to be tall structures giving rise to the planting scheme and revisions to the into water resources with well devel- opportunity for gravity fed irrigation. Derby Menu. Although some items on oped root systems. However, they can The water in the towers is pressurized the menu have few substitutes, others become a source of tough competition by gravity requiring no extra energy for such as oranges and kiwis could be for establishing annuals planted in the pumping the water onto the gardens. replaced with other similarly sized fruit same bed. This creates a cycle of resources where containing a similar array of nutrients waste is minimized and available mois- such as the Hardy Kiwi proposed in the Lastly, further study of the infl uences ture is effi ciently stored and used. upper production bed. of artistic approaches to landscape design, beyond the realms of the With regard to Campus Creek. it was visual and spatial, as emphasized in this discovered that the creek exhibits Further Study project, would be helpful. The analysis channelized and contaminated condi- Several areas of further study are trig- and development of design elements tions. However, these can be mitigated gered by this project. The fi rst is a study that stimulate all fi ve senses in creat- by the proposed wetland. The wetland on the actual psychological percep- ing powerful and moving experiences provides longer residence time and tion of sustainable food production for the user would enrich the design holding capacity for the stream water. and general ecological function in the proposals. This allows contaminants a place to landscape. How people view sustain- breakdown over time. In addition, be- able and productive landscapes in new and unfamiliar settings is a question Summary cause of the extra storage capacity of This project brings together the power- the stream due to the wetland expan- that would benefi t the design and plan- ning of sustainable, food-producing ful infl uences of landscape form and sion, damaging peak fl ows downstream space in an eff ort to promote a better are decreased. landscapes particularly if done on the K-State Campus. model for agriculture on a major univer- sity campus. A regenerative system is Food Production Another area of study is the atmo- proposed, in which resources are effi - The results from the productivity sphere of agriculture that currently ex- ciently stored and cycled, waste is mini- analysis of the proposed food garden, ists at K-State. A better understanding mized, natural ecology is modeled, and indicates several things about the of the agriculture curriculum and goals long-term productivity is maintained. and about the poten- of that College would illuminate oppor- Through the design, the negative con- tial for supplementation of the Derby tunities for the blending of these types notations of “messy ecosystems” are Dining Hall Menu. Tables 6.2 and 6.3 of campus food production projects diminished by the artful integration of Indicate that some proposed species with the current agricultural academic sustainable ecological functions within planted have the potential to provide programs. the campus landscape. This landscape

80 Chapter 7| Conclusions The Fruits of Landscape 81 Bibliography

“About Us.” Middlebury Organic Farm. Accessed November 22, 2012. http:// “Import Share of Consumption.” United States Department of Agriculture www.middlebury.edu/sustainability/food/mcog (USDA). Last modified Wed. May 30th, 2012. http://www.ers.usda. gov/topics/international-markets-trade/us-agricultural-trade/import- Anon. 2012. Background: UMass Permaculture. http://www.umasspermacul- share-of-consumption.aspx ture.com/about/. “Income Statement for the U.S. farm sector, 2009-2013F.” United States Campus Sustainability Initiative: Food Sub-Committee. Last modified 2013. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Data collected from 2011. http:// http://www.umass.edu/livesustainably/food-epac-subcommittee www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/farm-income-and-wealth-statistics. Case iH. “Compare Specs.” Case iH Agriculture. Accessed March 15th, 2013. aspx http://www.caseih.com/en_us/Pages/compare_specs_results. Jacke, Dave & Eric Toensmeier. 2005. Edible Forest Gardens Volume One and aspx?idProduct=69 Two: Ecological Vision and Theory for Temperate Climate Permaculture. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing Company. Cruz, Tim. Et al. 2012. Prairie Festival: Annual Report Presentations. Land In- stitute. Salina, KS Jones, Alan. “A Brief History of the Plough.” The Society of Ploughmen. Ac- cessed March 15th, 2013. http://www.ploughmen.co.uk/ploughhistory. Dober, Richard P. 2000. Campus Landscape: Functions, Forms, Features. htm New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Jackson, Wes. 2011. Nature as Measure. Berkley, CA: Counterpoint. “Farm Reports.” Middlebury Organic Farm. Accessed November 22, 2012. http://www.middlebury.edu/sustainability/food/mcog “Land Institute Images.” The Land Institute. Accessed April 18th, 2013. http:// “Garden Gallery.” Ithaca College Permaculture Garden. Accessed March www.landinstitute.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2012/01/27/4f1de1dba2689 15th, 2013. http://icpermaculture.wordpress.com/gallery/ Lyle, John Tillman. 1994. Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Harb, Ryan MS, LEED AP. Franklin Permaculture Garden. Last modified June 2012. http://ryanharb.org/projects/umass-permaculture/franklin-per- Mars, Ross. 1996. The Basics of Permaculture Design. White River Junction, maculture-garden/ VT: Chelsea Green Publishing Company.

Hemenway, Toby. 2009. Gaia’s Garden: A Guide to Home-Scale Permacul- “Mission.” Middlebury College Organic Farm. Accessed March 12, 2013. nd ture. 2 Edition. (White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing http://middfarm.wordpress.com/mission/ Company. Mollison, Bill. 1990. Permaculture: A Practical Guide for a Sustainable Future. Holmgren, David. 2002. Permaculture: Principles & Pathways Beyond Sus- Washington, D.C.: Island Press. tainability. Hepburn, Victoria, : Permanent Publications. Nassauer, Joan Iverson. “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.” Landscape th “Home.” Ithaca College Permaculture Garden. Accessed January 20 , 2013. Journal 14 (1995): 161 – 170 http://icpermaculture.wordpress.com/

82 Bibliography The Fruits of Landscape 83 Bibliography (cont.)

Olin, Laurie, “Form, Meaning and Expression in Landscape Architecture.” U.S. Climate Data. “Climate-Manhattan-Kansas.” Last modified N/A. http:// Landscape Journal 7, no. 2 (1988): 149-168. www.usclimatedata.com/climate.php?location=USKS0358

“Organic Farm.” Middlebury: Sustainability - Food Systems. Accessed Febru- “U.S. exports of bulk and high-value agricultural products, by fiscal year.” ary 7th, 2013. http://www.middlebury.edu/sustainability/food/mcog United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Last Updated No- vember 20th, 2012. http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/foreign- “Organic Market Overview.” United States Department of Agriculture agricultural-trade-of-the-united-states-(fatus)/fiscal-year.aspx (USDA). Last modified Tues. June 19th, 2012. http://www.ers.usda.gov/ topics/natural-resources-environment/organic-agriculture/organic- Webster, Christopher L. & Matthews, Scott H. “Food-Miles and the Rela- market-overview.aspx tive Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the United States.” Environ- mental Science & Technology. 42 (2008): 3508-3513. Orr, David W. 2002. The Nature of Design: Ecology, Culture, and Human Inten- tion. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.

“Our Goals.” Ithaca College Permaculture Garden. Last modified N/A. http:// icpermaculture.wordpress.com/about/

Skabelund, Lee R. “Chicago-”. Photos. Taken September 19th, 2009.

Skabelund, Lee R. “KSU-ISC-Rain-Garden.” Photos. Taken May 15th, 2012.

Sperling’s BestPlaces. “Climate in Manhattan, Kansas.” Last modified N/A. http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/kansas/manhattan

Sullivan, Louis. “The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered.”Lippin - cott’s Magazine #57. March 1896. 403-09.

Thayer Jr., Robert L. 1994. Gray World, Green Heart: Technology, Nature and the Sustainable Landscape. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Thayer, Robert L. “The Experience of Sustainable Landscapes.” Landscape Journal 8 no. 2 (1989): 101–110.

Treib, Marc. “Must Landscapes Mean?: Approaches to Significance in Recent Landscape Architecture.”Landscape Journal 14 no. 1 (1995): 46-62.

“UMass Permaculture.” UMass Dining. Accessed November 15th, 2012. http://www.umassdining.com/sustainability/permaculture

84 Bibliography The Fruits of Landscape 85 Glossary

Permaculture: Sector Theory:

“Consciously designed landscapes which mimic A strategy for site layout in which certain the patterns and relationships found in nature, climatic factors such as wind, sun, and water while yielding an abundance of food, fibre and are spatially identified informing the appropriate energy for provision of local needs (Mollison location for garden or homestead elements. 1979).” Zone Theory: Landscape Influence: A strategies for site programming in which site The effectiveness of the outdoor spaces and elements involving more frequent maintenance forms in gaining the attention of an audience, and higher levels of activity are located closer to communicated a message, or creating an experi- the designated center (i.e. a or work build- ence. ing) and elements requiring less maintenance are placed farther away. Guild: Sustainable Food Production: “A group of plants and animals harmoniously interwoven into a pattern of mutual support, A method of growing raising edible crops and often centered around one major species, that livestock that utilizes strategies that efficiently benefits humans while creating habitat (Hemen- manage and regenerate resources and recycle way 2000, 183).” waste.

Insectary: Nutrient Accumulators:

A planted zone in a landscape that incorporates Certain plant species that draw specific nutrients plants that attract insects for their value in pol- from deep in the soil and concentrate them in lination, pest control, and the decomposition of their leaves. The fallen foliage of these plants organic material. builds the topsoil around them rich with the ac- cumulated nutrients. Wetland:

A low lying area along a stream corridor exhibit- ing riparian vegetation and frequent standing water.

Wet-Meadow:

A low gradual sloping grassy area that is frequently moist and exhibits vegetation that tolerate both extended wet and dry periods.

86 Glossary The Fruits of Landscape 87 Master Plant List

BotanicalName CommonName Edible CompanionPlants/GuildSpecies HarvestTotal Harvestrate Qty Harvestrate Source NitrogenFixers Gaia'sGarden:AGuidetoHomeͲScale Trifoliumspp. Clover no Permaculture, TobyHemenway,2009. Shepherdiaargetnea Buffaloberry yes Amorphafruticosa FalseIndigo no Psoraleaesculenta PrairieTurnip yes Ceanothusspp. WildLilac no ProduceSpecies Malus' RoxburyRusset' Apple,RoxburyRusset yes (Mulch:clover,rubarb,nasturtium, 2880 720 4 5bushels(240lbs) http://www.grit.com/fruit/heirloomͲappleͲ comfrey),(Bulbs:daffodils,camas,garlic varietiesͲyouͲcanͲgrow.aspx?page=2 chives),(NutrientAccumulartors:yarrow, https://www.digthedirt.com/plants/15344Ͳ chicory,plantain),(Insectary:dill,fennel, applesͲmalusͲpumilaͲroxburyͲrusset beebalm).

Malus' Liberty' Apple,Liberty yes SeeAbove 9072 1296 7 6Ͳ9bushels(288Ͳ432lbs) http://www.gurneys.com/product.asp?pn=1295 8 Lycopersiconesculentum Tomatos yes Asparagus,Basil,Beans,Borage,Carrots, 1280 20 64 10Ͳ20lbs/plant http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Celery,Dill,Lettuce,Melons,Onions, companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables; Parsley,Peppers,Radishes,Spinach, http://www.hightunnels.org/ForEducators/Toma Thyme. toProduction/Versus.htm Ocimum Basil yes 39.2 0.28 140 .28lbs/s.f.(freshweight)1 http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/hil/hilͲ125.html plant/s.f. Solanumtuberosum'Viking' Potato,Red yes 540 5 108 3Ͳ5lbs/plant http://www.almanac.com/plant/potatoes; http://homeguides.sfgate.com/averageͲpotatoͲ yieldͲperͲplantͲ48132.html

Brassicaoleracea Broccoli yes 85.8 1.3 66 .4Ͳ1.3lbs/plant Daucuscarota Carrots yes Beans,Lettuce,Onions,Peas,Radishes, 319.5 1.125 284 1.125lbs/s.f. http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Rosemary,Sage,Tomatoes. companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables; http://www.countryfarmͲlifestyles.com/growingͲ carrots.html Coriandrumsativum Coriander/Cilantro yes 51.48 0.39 132 .39lbs/s.f. http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/7236.pdf

88 Appendix A The Fruits of Landscape 89 BotanicalName CommonName Edible CompanionPlants/GuildSpecies HarvestTotal Harvestrate Qty Harvestrate Source ProduceSpecies CucumisSativus Cucumbers yes Beans,Cabbage,Cauliflower,Corn, 264 8 33 8lbs/plant http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Lettuce,Peas,Radishes,Sunflowers. companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables; http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition _articles.asp?id=1311 Alliumsativum Garlic yes 19 0.125 152 .125lbs/bulb http://www.filareefarm.com/growing.html

Actinidiaaruguta HardyKiwi yes 5500 125 44 75Ͳ125lbs/vine http://www.fruit.cornell.edu/mfruit/kiwifruit.ht ml; http://www.luvnpeas.org/edibility/edible7.html

Brassicaoleraceaacephala Kale yes 165 5 33 5lbs/4footrow http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition _articles.asp?id=1314

Lactucasativa Lettuce yes Asparagus,Beets,Brusselssprouts, 143.52 0.46 312 .46lbs/s.f. http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Cabbage,Carrots,Corn,Cucumbers, companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables; Eggplant,Onions,Peas,Potatoes, http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/docs/W Radishes,Spinach,Strawberries, alettuce.html Sunflowers,Tomatoes. Cucumismelo Cantaloupe/Muskmelon yes 143.52 0.46 312 .46lbs/s.f. Citrulluslanatus Watermelon yes 180 20 9 20lbs/plant Allium cepa Onions,Yellow yes Beets,Broccoli,Cabbage,Carrots,Lettuce, 994.56 1.12 888 489cwt/acre http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Peppers,Potatoes,Spinach,Tomatoes. companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables

Origanum Oregano yes 18.48 0.14 132 .14lbs/s.f. http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/sites/default/fil es/pubsͲandͲpapers/2009Ͳ01ͲhighͲtunnelͲgreekͲ oreganoͲproductionͲ2008.pdf

Petroselinumcrispum Parsley yes 60.72 0.46 132 .46lbs/s.f. http://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/HO /HOͲ202.html Pyrus'Anjou' Pears yes 2320 580 4 580lbs/tree http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/hor ticulture/M1157.html Capsicumannuum BellPeppers yes Basil,Coriander,Onions,Spinach, 264 2 132 2lbs/plant http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Tomatoes. companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables; http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition _articles.asp?id=1318

90 Appendix A The Fruits of Landscape 91 BotanicalName CommonName Edible CompanionPlants/GuildSpecies HarvestTotal Harvestrate Qty Harvestrate Source Raphanussativus Radishes yes Basil,Coriander,Onions,Spinach, 132 10 13 10lbs/30ftrow http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Tomatoes. companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables; http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/hil/hilͲ25.html Rosmarinusofficinalis Rosemary yes 0 Salviaofficinalis Sage yes 0 Spinaciaoleracea Spinach yes 132 6 22 5Ͳ6lbs/6ftrow http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition _articles.asp?id=1320 Cucurbita Squash yes 44.88 0.34 132 .34lbs/s.f. http://bioengr.ag.utk.edu/ExtProg/Vegetable/ye ar/VegInitReport07/Squash/Performance%20of% 20Butternut%20Squash%20Cultivars.pdf

Fragaria Strawberries yes 1280 4 320 2Ͳ4pints/plant http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition _articles.asp?id=1322 Brassicarapa RapiferaGroup PrairieTurnips yes 115.92 0.69 168 .69lb/s.f.http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/hil/hilͲ26.html Pisummacrocarpon SnapPeas yes 30.36 0.23 132 .14Ͳ.23lbs/s.f.http://nwrec.hort.oregonstate.edu/snowpea.ht ml Brassicaoleraceavar.capitata Cabbage yes Beans,Celery,Cucumbers,Dill,Kale, 82.5 2.5 33 2.5lbs/plant http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ Lettuce,Onions,Potatoes,Sage,Spinach, companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables; Thyme. http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/hil/hilͲ7.html Mentha Mint yes Tomatoes,Cabbage http://www.almanac.com/plant/mint; http://www.almanac.com/content/plantͲ companionsͲlistͲtenͲcommonͲvegetables PestRepellents Tropaeolummajus Nasturtium no Gaia'sGarden Fagopyrumesculentum Buckwheat no Melissaofficinalis LemonBalm no Alliumsativum Garlic no Baptisiaaustralis FalseIndigo no Pollinators Aster Aster no www.xerces.org Monarda Beebalm no Liatris Blazingstar no Baptisia Wildindigo no Lobelia Lobelia no Ascelpias Milkweed no Dalea Prairieclover no Echinacea Purpleconeflower no 92 Appendix A The Fruits of Landscape 93 BotanicalName CommonName Edible CompanionPlants/GuildSpecies HarvestTotal Harvestrate Qty Harvestrate Source WetlandSpecies Asclepias incarnata SwampMilkweed Asclepias tuberosa ButterflyMilkweed http://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/garden Aster novae-angliae NewEnglandAster sͲgardening/yourͲgarden/plantͲfinder.aspx; Eupatorium perfoliatum CommonBoneset Glandularia canadensis RoseVerbena/Vervain Lobelia cardinalis CardinalFlower Lobelia siphilitica GreatBlueLobelia Carex vulpinoidea FoxSedge Carex lupulina HopSedge Rudbeckia hirta BlackͲeyedSusan Solidago rigida StiffGoldenrod Zizia aurea GoldenAlexanders/Zizia Typha latifolia Cattail Carex muskingumensis MuskingumSedge Carex stricta TussockSedge Carex stipata AwlͲFruitedSedge Wet-Prairie Species Sporobolus heterolopsis PrairieDropseed Schizachyrium scoparium LittleBluestem http://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/garden Sorghastrum nutans IndianGrass sͲgardening/yourͲgarden/plantͲfinder.aspx; Elymus canadensis CanadaWildRye Elymus virginicus VirginiaWildRye Panicum virgatum Switchgrass Andropogongerardii BigBluestem Liatrisspicata Gayfeather Carex hystericina BottleBrushSedge Juncus effusus SoftRush Salvia azurea PitcherSage Liatris pycnostachya PrairieBlazingStar Liatris spicata BlazingStar Ratibida columnifera PrairieConeflower Baptisia australis BlueWildIndigo Baptisia bracteata PlainsWildIndigo Dalea candida WhitePrairieClover

94 Appendix A The Fruits of Landscape 95 Human Subjects Waiver Form

By participating in this interview, the informant is contributing to the research effort of this Master’s Project and Report. This project is intended to propose a design for a food garden that uses permaculture strategies and techniques, located near the Derby Dining Hall on the KSU Campus. There are two main goals for the project. The first is to forecast the productivity of the designed garden in order to discern the extent to which it would be able to provide for the Dining Hall's food needs. The other goal is to create a garden using the sustainable and regenerative practices of permaculture in a way that fits within the existing aesthetics and future vision of the K-State Campus.

The method of interviewing is the only research method utilized in this project that will involve human subjects. The project proposes 5-7 semi-qualitative interviews. 5-7 informants will been chosen for their expertise under the following headings: Permaculture, K-State Campus Landscape Evolution and Current Function, K-State Campus Master Plan Update Task Force, and Derby Food Center Operations. Each interview will be conducted either face to face or over the phone. A list of questions (attached) tailored to each interviewee's expertise and experience will be provided in advance of the interview and the consent of the interviewee. The questions will provide the basic structure of the interview. However, follow-up questions are expected during each interview to pursue elaboration on the basic questions and topics covered in the interview outline. Each interview will be a maximum of 45 minutes. Each interview will be subject to audio recording with consent of the interviewee. All the information gathered during the interviews will be used to inform the design phase of this project. With the information gained from the experts in permaculture, interviewees with experience concerning the landscape of the Kansas State Campus, a landscape design professional and an informant representing the Derby Dining Hall, design decisions in the actual programming and conceptualization of the permaculture garden. Information concerning the interviewees name, job , and job description, will be used in identifying them in the resulting report with their formal consent.

The interview will invovle questions pertaining to the informant’s occupation. The informant reserves the right to withhold any information that would put him/her at risk in regard to his/her occupation. No information regarding the occupation of the informant will be used to put the informant at risk in regard to their occupation, but only to inform and substanciate the design of the proposed campus garden.

All interviews will be audio recorded only with the particpants knowledge and consent. Participants will be assured that their responses will be accurately used and that due credit will be given in the final research report.

In the case of questions regarding the research, the right’s of the research participants, or to report a research related injury contact the following people emediately:

Laurence Clement (Principal Investigator)

- Phone: 785.532.5961 - Email: [email protected]

William Mann (Student Research Colaborator)

- Phone 913.526.5313 - Email: [email protected]

In the case of segnificant new findings during the interview process, the participant may be asked to participate in a followup interview and/or further collaboration to investigate those new findings.

Participation is voluntary, refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled, and the subject may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits, to which the subject is otherwise entitled.

Signature of Participant: ______Date: ______

96 Appendix B The Fruits of Landscape 97 Interview Material

b. Joseph Meyer: KSU Landscape Installation and Maintenance Semi-Qualitative Interviews Manager

Informants For: K-State Campus Permaculture: Master’s Project and Report c. K-State Master Plan Update Task Force Member

Preliminary Fact Sheet: d. Dining Hall Representative

Name: 3. How I want to use the information and how I will protect it?

Education: a. Informants will be quoted to substantiate and inform the Master’s Project and Report Current Occupation b. Informing the structure and methods of my project Employer: c. Informing the continuing formulation for questions and search for Job Title: literature Summary of Job Description: d. All responses will be audio recorded with formal consent of interviewee

e. All information will be used accurately with due credit given to the informants Orientation for Interviewee:

1. Definition of Project

a. Urban/Organic (Sustainable Agriculture) Food Garden on the K- State Campus

b. Location: K-State University Campus – Derby Dining Hall

c. Goals:

i. Estimate the potential to provide food for Derby

ii. Contribute to the campus function and aesthetic

2. Interviewees

a. Hilary Noonan and Steve Moring: Permaculture Specialists

98 Appendix B The Fruits of Landscape 99 Interview Material

For the Permaculture Expert: Hilary Noonan b. What should be the first steps?

Introduction Questions: c. What social issues/opportunities are present with a project on campus like this? 1. How did you get involved in Permaculture? d. What are your recommendations for forecasting the productivity a. Why are you interested in permaculture? of this site?

b. How did you find out about it? e. Have you worked on projects of similar size and context?

c. Where did you receive your training? Anecdotal Questions:

d. How long have you been involved in permaculture? 1. Tell me about your favorite permaculture project you’ve worked on and why it was your favorite? Current practice Questions: 2. What were the positive/negative real life outcomes of the project ecologi- 2. How are you involved in permaculture now? cally, socially, and/or economically?

a. What projects have you or are you currently working on? 3. Does a permaculture garden have a place on the campus at Kansas State b. What is one principle or strategy of permaculture that has im- University? pacted you and your work the most?

c. How does permaculture fit into the realm of landscape architec- ture and vice versa?

d. (Steve Moring) What are some of the key teaching points on permaculture that you specifically emphasize to your students?

e. In your opinion, what are the essential programmatic elements in a permaculture design (i.e. swales, paths, staging areas, animals, species combinations, etc?

Project Specific Questions:

3. What are your recommendations for me as I endeavor to begin a design of a permaculture garden on campus?

a. What might be the productivity potential of a 3.5 acre site?

i. Sources or Precedents?

100 Appendix B The Fruits of Landscape 101 Interview Material

K-State Campus Master Plan Update Task Force Representative: Mark Taussig 2. What are some of your hopes for the K-State campus 10 years from now in terms of the evolution of the landscape? 1. What has been your role in the Kansas State Campus Master Plan Update Task Force? 3. Would you consider the K-State campus as a leader in landscape sustain- ability? If not, what has impeded K-State’s progress in becoming a front 2. Could you give a summary of the current master plan? runner of campus sustainability?

a. What are the aesthetic goals (is there a common vocabulary of 4. Does a permaculture garden have a place on the campus at Kansas State form, materiality, or layout)? University? b. What are the functional goals (i.e. circulation, outdoor spatial us- age, access roads, etc.)?

c. What are some dilemmas that you are seeking to solve with the updated master plan?

3. What are some current landscape projects (specific renovations or expan- sions of certain campus spaces) that are in the design phase or that are already under construction?

4. What have been specifically sustainable landscape projects on campus that have occurred during your time here? Explain the degrees of success- ful or failure each one exhibited.

5. Does the proposal of a permaculture garden fit within the k-state master plan? What are some opportunities/challenges?

6. What are some opportunities and constraints specific to the project site?

a. Physical barriers

b. Administrative obstacles

c. Conflict in visions for that space: Does this idea conflict with the updated Master Plan?

Anecdotal Questions:

1. What has been your personal vision for the K-State campus since you started work as the campus Landscape Architect?

102 Appendix B The Fruits of Landscape 103 Interview Material

For the Derby Dining Hall Representative: Mark Edwards a. How do you think Derby could benefit from a food garden on campus? 1. What sustainable initiatives are going on right now with K-State Housing and Dining? b. What are the opportunities?

a. Composting c. What would be the challenges?

b. Green Roofs 5. Would using locally grown food in this way require major changes in the operations at Derby? If so, what might the changes be? c. Recycling

2. What are Derby Dining Halls needs

a. Food Inventory

i. Food groups commonly ordered

ii. What are your most expensive food items that are bought on a regular basis?

iii. Is there a nutritional agenda, if so what does it consist of?

3. Consumption and Production?

a. How much food do you go through?

i. Grains and Nuts

ii. Fruits and Vegetables

iii. Meat

iv. Dairy and Eggs?

b. Where do you get your food?

c. How much compost do you produce?

d. Do you any food in your inventory from local vendors currently?

4. Does a permaculture garden have a place on the Campus at Kansas State University?

104 Appendix B The Fruits of Landscape 105 Suitability Analysis

Slope Aspect Slope Percentage To increase solar access for maximum plant production, slopes facing south are optimal for a permaculture garden. Water harvesting and management is key for a permaculture site. Sites with a gently sloping grade are optimal for water harvesting in a permaculture garden.

106 Appendix C The Fruits of Landscape 107 Suitability Analysis (cont.)

Site Soils Stream Buffer Zone Soils with higher organic material compositions were chosen as most appropriate for food production. A 75 foot stream buffer area was zoned along Campus Creek to protect delicate riparian habitat and to avoid the ingestion of contaminants by the food garden species from the creek.

108 Appendix C The Fruits of Landscape 109 Suitability Analysis (cont.)

Dining Hall Proximity Final Suitability Analysis Map Areas closest to the dining halls are most suitable for permaculture according to the Zone/Sector Shows areas were a permaculture garden would be most suitable on the K-State Campus. Theory. The place with the most activity or the origin of maintenance and garden care should be at the center of the design.

110 Appendix C The Fruits of Landscape 111