sign in sign up
<<
Home , Foodscaping, Greenhouse, Green wall

IMAGEABILITY and FOODSCAPES How can Communal food growing increase social cohesion and help to reimagine the image of Nodes ‘Suburbia’ ? Sub-questions -

1) Can help in place-making and thus changing the identity of suburbia ? answered with the neighbourhood and urban strategy. Edges Paths 2) How does foodscaping help in bringing people together ? will be answered with findings from 2nd literature and tested at the architectural scale.

Hierarchy of spaces ELEMENTS THAT MAKE UP THE IMAGE OF A CITY Redefining (Lynch 1960) Urban form House and Boundaries and the street betweenprivate thepublic imageability (third place) private and

public boundaries Landmarks

Districts UNDERSTANDING THE SUBURBAN IMAGE

USING THE FOOD TRANSECT Retail character Housing character

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

USING THE HOUSING TRANSECT

MENTAL IMAGE- COLLECTIVE IDENTITY

Peri-urban Frequency Path Edge Node District Landmark Rural Boundaries over 75% Pentrebane 50-75% 25-50% Farm 12-25% Woodlands, Wetlands and Suburban Ponds Fairwater Farming land

Suburban Communities on the St. Fagans Boundaries

PLASDWR SITE Cardiff city showing the site location

PRODUCTIVE Children PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL Primary School learn My child is learning about foodscaping

Farmhouse

Produce Housing clusters storage

Community center Barn Kitchen indoor farm Selling New residents Integrated Farmshop A house with a backyard Cafe garden and an indoor garden Rooftop Grain Garden Wall planters

I can see my child play in the coutyard garden Grain crops

Housing clusters Tenant Elderly Site strategy diagram showing the food cycle A House with a common I can work on the farm garden and a coomon and make a living out of it kichen ILLUSTRATIVE CO-HOUSING ELEVATION Not to Scale 1ST LITERATURE ROLE OF THE URBAN FORM FOR COMPACT Area in open development NEIGHBOURHOOD UNIT SUSTAINABLE URBAN FRINGE DEVELOP- preferably 160 acres URBAN VOIDS in any case it should house (Perry 1929) LOW DENSITY AGRARIAN MENT? enough people to require URBAN FORM ( Transick 1986) one elementary school Radius - 1/4 mile COMMUNAL LIVING THROUGH EDGELESS CITY ( Kotharkar et.al 2014) (Lang 2003) COMPACT CITY (Jacobs 1961) shopping districts in pe- URBAN FOODSCAPING ? riphery at traffic junctions LOST SPACE SUBURBANIZATION and prefereably bunched in ( Transick 1986) (McGranahan and Satterthwaite 2014, United form Nations 2018, Piorr et.al. 2011) SOCIAL COHESION URBAN SPATIAL DESIGN (CoE 2008) 10% of area to PERIMETER HOUSING URBAN EXPANSION PATTERNS recreation and ( Kotharkar et.al 2014, Lang 2003) park space interior streets not wider (Bentley et al. 1985) than req. for specific use and giving easy access to BEHAVIOUR RURAL URBAN FRINGE shops and community to CO-HOUSING (Lewin 1936) center civic COMMUNAL LIVING URBAN-RURAL FRINGE center arterial street ( Vestbro, 2010) DEVELOPMENT EXTENSIVE GREEN BELT (Perry, C 1929) GARDEN CITY CONTINUOUS PRODUCTIVE The neighbourhood unit (Howard 1902) (Viljoen, et.al 2005) ON THE PERIPHERY MICRO-URBANISM ( Garden cities, Howard 1902) ( Lovra, 2019) Garden suburbs built on the SELF-SUFFICIENT Garden city concept FOR HOUSING SOCIAL INTERACTION? THE ROLE OF URBAN AGRICULTURE IN URBAN FRINGE DEVELOPMENT? civic institutions

six equal wards

Farmlands GREEN WALLS Became a distinct character in KITCHEN GARDENS THE AESTHETICS OF FOOD British housing INDOOR/ VERTICAL GROWING ALONGSIDE URBAN FARMING ? ROOFTOP FARMS VEGAN LIVING ORGANIC FARMING Garden Suburbs

HYDROPONICS (Mollison, B) URBAN AGRICULTURE ARCHITECTURE Edge cities + Settlement expansion Urban sprawl urban erosion - Local businesses + Community National Mega- corpora- forests Flea markets tions open spaces + CSA’S Associations shopping theme - Sub-urban centers parks Urban Land trusts markets malls Group- Walmart cruise ships - Parks Local corporate owned fig. 2.7 Introducing productive fig. 2.8 Feeding the city with retailers super jobs - spaces in the productive land markets continuous landscapes continuous landscapes Jointly house TV + edge owned sitting Barter Guerilla + cities property gifts Squatting Family and Walking Undefined friends Remote Isolated, sprawling form of flats Cycling Perimeter housing development in developed countries Storage Public comes from compact cities model lockers Transport Personal Zones Auto fig. 2.5 high density city fabric fig. 2.6 Identifying the continuous Plane landscapes F.g. 2.7 CPULs (Continuous Productive Urban Polycentric cities Landscapes) reproduced with reference (Viljoen et.al. 2005) fig. 2.9. Permaculture Zones (as defined by Anderson 2006)

Urban agriculture is in itself a farming activity whereas food- Spatial configuration of foodscapes scaping is derived from ‘landscaping’; thus assuming that it Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 should predominantly be the design of land in context with Foodscapes are food production in direct food growing. surroundings of people thus affecting and the three typologies show different uses of the spaces Types of Urban agriculture as recognised by Steel (2009) available. connectng to people ( Bosschaart, 2015, Typology 1 : fully private space p22). Backyard gardens Typology 2 : fully private, fully public and shared private. 1. Survival 2. Lifestyle meet basic food needs in areas urban agriculture for a sustainable Typology 3 only offers 2: fully public and fully private. with food shortages lifestyle (Sonne, W 2009) Progress in Planning satellite cities/edge cities distributed 3. World- Market 4. Community The three typologies of perimeter block - Urban food production for social aspects of urban throughout the markets agriculture of Walter Gropius1929 Allotments

Community gardens Guerilla farming

alternating housing and

green space Livestock farms Urban farmshops Commercial/ mixed use micro-urban housing Rooftop farming

Gardens Gardens fig. 2.11. Types of foodscapes food dependant on the community gives urban foodscapes a local character( Bosschaart, 2015) Gardens Gardens 1ST LITERATURE FINDINGS SUMMARY Gardens

Summary Embeded CPULs feding the perimeter housing neighbourhood - Imageability of a foodscape is the perception of that landscape and the measure of the interactions of nature and human factors.

self-sufficient housing - The image of the city is the sum of the social interactions and the environment therefore perceived as the behaviour of that place. - Social cohesion contributes to the sense of place and evokes an inviting image thus giving it a cohesive character.

- The housing typologies that these models produce, have an indirect effect on the behaviour of that place and a direct relation to the imageability. applying permaculture prin- ciples to urban planning -The interactions between the building and its environment contribute towards developing the socio-spatial character of the place green belt on the periphery - Micro-urbanism is a way to exploring the possibilities of boundaries between public and private space by redefining the threshold conditions at a finer grain and enhance interactions between residents fig. 2.10. Concept for a new paradigm (Using the findings from 1st literature) - the green belt agriculture on the periphery and embeded CPULs can create a way for the city to grow with the foodscape giving way for self-sufficient housing - Communal living could provide the necessary platform where the boundaries between the urban form and the building create these opportune spaces to harmoniously maneuver the hierarchy of the private - semi-public - communal spaces. RESEARCH QUESTION Conceptual ideas on wider context - to identify Role of communal growing for social cohesion to reimagine the the research gap SUBURBAN ‘Image of Suburbia’

Growth of the city RESEARCH GAP PLACEMAKING suburban recreation villages

URBAN SPRAWL PUBLIC SPACES URBANISATION green belt VS COMPACT CITY socio-economic identity CULTURAL URBAN FORM social aspect LANDSCAPE suburban recreation villages IMAGEABILITY URBAN FOODSCAPING local produce SOCIAL AGRICULTURE COHESION each specialising in culture/ ARCHITECTURE FOR different foods sense of place SUB-URBANISATION SOCIAL COHESION EATING TOGETHER

place-making image of suburbia CO-HOUSING ECONOMY RESEARCH GAP

COMMUNAL LIVING Fig. 3.1 wider context- city wide Fig 3.2 Suburbia Fig 3.3 Research gap - food network development urban to architectural scale COMMUNAL CO-HOUSING COMMUNAL FOODSCAPING TESTING THE CONCEPT AT DE- LIVING GROWING SIGN STRATEGY LEVEL Finding the Research Gap AN OVERVIEW OF THE URBAN STRATEGY Suburban

Continuous productive urban land- Urban scapes conected through the city Green belt and the the eco-villages Micro-urbanism Government Proposed - Suburban housing sites Urban form and the relationship of the CPULs imageability of the imageability neighbourhood to the house maintaining the ecological balance

suburban

urban plasdwr House and Food network the street (third place) foodscaping as leisure Imageability

boundaries semi-private

private public

Community buiding foodscaping enhancing semi-public through food growing the landscape 2ND LITERATURE

Place-making high level of passive CPULs surveillance DISCUSSION (Viljoen 2005) Defining edges with the ma- Kitchen Gardens Food networking Private face terial therefore brings out more (rear gardens) possibilities for a porous enclosure Transitional spaces and a legibility that can bring out Roof gardens the spatial hierarchy for the thresh-

Public face old spaces between the inside and Semi-public spaces outside of the building. As land- Plot allotments scaping elements define the archi- tectural fabric to create an active Thresholds Dead frontage (blank walls on public and cohesive space. (Psillidis,2006) Street space) The courtyard thrn becomes the Hydroponic Semi-enclosed transi- Variety of surface fin- the third space, where edges, al- tion spaces ishes denoting function and ownership coves and props like seating and trees become the fourth spaces for opportune chance happenings. Micro- Urbanism Greenhouses (Lovra, 2019) Hierarchy of spaces in a residential block

Directional Semi-private places Space Third spaces Arrival Alcove Arrival Space Space movement along edge Dominant Social spaces space Ownership Alcove

Sequential space Alcove Spatial morphology Activities

Dominant space with alcoves Landscaping design Social Interactions (Motloch 1990) Edge security in large open spaces Space and place Open spaces- Gehl (Gehl 1987) Courtyard Housing Inward ori- Mass -space dy- ented; pure namic interplay space MINDMAPPING THE 2ND LITERATURE

Space dominant built form

Open Vegetated Edge Architectural Counterpart Private Plant material as Plant material as Intermediate Public architectonic edge naturalistic edge Porous open edge Levels of Privacy INTERACTIONS BETWEEN RESIDENTS

ANALYSING ADR PROPOSAL Co-Housing 4.6 SUMMARY

2nd Literature review Findings Main road Types of spaces

In-between spaces - third spaces = transitional spaces

Courtyard Housing - Farmshop Spatial morphology of mass and space Play Area

Plant material as a design Element

Landscape design

Plot Allotments

Parking

Meeting Points for Possible interactions

Testing the design

Semi-pivate- access controlled and Directional accessible to residents and associated people only space Semi-public - private space accesible herb to public Directional Utility Utility Common Bedroom Bedroom Store Store Her herb Kitchen/ Third Space- transitional space space dinning toilet toilet Toilets His

Bedroom Living Living Bedroom Alcove

toilet

Bedroom Bedroom

greenhouse

Directional space herb

Utility

Store

Living herbs

herb herb herb Spatial Morphology of Communal food forest growing Arrival space

herb herb food forest herb

hydroponics

greenhouse

Kitchen/

dinning Common herb herb herb Play Area herb

herb herb

herb

Utility Store Private Living Arrival space

herb herb

toilet Dominant space Bedroom Bedroom communal

herb herb herb

Directional space

herb herb herb herb herb herb identifying the private, semi-public Semi-private Roof gardens herb herb herb 1. herb herb herb herb and communal thresholds herb herb herb herb herb

herb herb

herb herb herb herb herb herb

herb herb herb herb

Ground Floor Plan scale :1:100

Semi-public - Creating threshold

herb herb herb herb spiral spaces as the core Bedroom Bedroom

toilet

Living herb herb herb Store Utility

hydroponics greenhouse herb spiral Kitchen/ Dinning communal eating

herb Threshold spaces

herb

hydroponics greenhouse Entrance courtyard

Stepped gardens for visual connection and interactions at different levels Bedroom Living

Bedroom First Floor Plan Store

Utility toilet scale : 1:100

6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND FRAMEWORK 1 Site Study 2 Theoretical Background 3 Tools of Analysis 4 Design Tests - Neighbourhood image boundaries METHODOLOGY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH - Collective identity - distance semi-private - eye level SPATIAL PARAMETERS - physical parameters - noise level private DESIGN 1 semi-public RESEARCH QUESTION third spaces CRITERIA DESIGN 2 public semi-public REFLECT CASE-STUDIES going from - activity level BROAD 1ST LITERATURE space to place - communication - light REVIEW 2ND LITERATURE REVIEW SPECIFIC CONCLUSION

RESEARCH AIM courtyards as - spatial organisation semi-private housing QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH REFLECT -DESIGN thresholds - green elements typology FINDINGS - furniture

RESEARCH FINDINGS imageability - collective identity Physical parameters communication spatial organisation FRAMEWORK - Neighbourhood image - paths - edges - Collective identity - nodes Ashley vale, Bristol - UK

little to no visual ‘Image’ based on interviews connection Cafe obscured by vegetation good access to green The yard space pleasant

city farm like it very much common nice atmosphere the yard allotments garden community The cafe City Farm City farm lighthouse park farm cafe The yard walk playground allotments downhill Space heirarchy allotments common garden

Findings

A city farm in a residential setting attracts more people than it would on the outskirts

Gardens when used as a means of semi-private spaces invite people from other areas as well- thus making it a place

visual connections to the growing spaces are necessary to attract people by means of different activities in and around these spaces. Acivity map

Agrocite, Gennevilliers, Colombes - Paris - AgroCité is designed to introduce and support the dynamics of urban agriculture and provide support for the cultural and educa- tional activities related to the R-URBAN project, currently emerging in the city of Colombes. workshop space

a sample mental map by an area for activities related to nature and one of the residents agriculture

Findings

A strategically placed community garden can attract people from far away places

an area for People tend to occupy the edges of the boundar- cooking ies to interact

Cooking spaces next to growing spaces create opportunites for high level activity

an area for

Centraal Wonen- Delft- Rooterdam, - Cohousing project with 4 clusters grouped around garden spaces Findings Activity levels high activity Space heirarchy walking by Visual connection to the growing spaces fro the primary school cycling slow motion mostly kids - communication running communal spaces is necessary - activity level - light slow motion Red cluster Courtyards regulate the flow and the degree of walking privacy moving your chair- one green cluster place to another activities for visual connections to the growing spaces are nec- everyone planting essary to attract people by means of different activ- semi-public access ities in and around these spaces. routes sitting on the bench play areas add to the safety of the image by bring- yellow cluster communal spaces reading a book gardens communicating with ing a friendly environment and changing the be- other Growing spaces low activity haviour of the place kitchen/dinning

flexible seating blue cluster Green spaces Growing spaces - spatial organisation kitchen/dinning - physical parameters - green elements - distance - furniture - eye level 25 m - noise level

important threshold 7.0 m 6.50 m

3.8 m DESIGN TESTS physical visual connections/ connecting to the sur- roundings from the outside Accessibility TREES INCREASE to green space designing PRIVACY ACROSS STREET through boundaries courtyard HOUSING WIDE VIEWING ANGLE according to Visual FARMSHOP FROM INSIDE

LEVEL CHANGE- PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE

GARDENS opportunity to interact

HOUSING FARMSHOP THE INTERFACE : EFFECT ON PRIVATE SPACES

GARDENS For the public/private interface to make private life richer, instead of destroying privacy altogether, it is vital that its degree of permeability is under the control of the private HOUSING users.

FARMSHOP GARDENS

THRESHOLDS

Public face Public face Facade Street Facade Street threshold threshold

Back Back

Shop Shop Entrance Cohousing unit Entrance Cohousing unit threshold threshold

Front habitable rooms on the public face and corners Cohousing unit Cohousing unit

Will be more inviting outward facing open Courtyard and meet people Courtyard perimeter blocks however front will - medium density remain less active - affordable - eye on the street (surveillance opportuni- ties) - changes in surface material

SKETCH PLAN 1 SKETCH PLAN 2

CHARACTER OF THE NEW IMAGE Activate Public face Facade Street threshold Front

entrance from Shop greenhouse Entrance kitchen/ threshold dinning Stroll through the community center

Back

creating alcoves / Cohousing unit niches in thresholds communal spaces Courtyard on ground floor

SKETCH PLAN 3

*Reference ideas

ASAWARI DALVI MA-AD DISSERTATION THESIS