‘Local food’ for thought: How healthy is a commuter lifestyle?

I heard this morning that NPR has discovered “agriburbia.” Here’s a link to Luke Runyon’s report on the phenomenon of developers building subdivisions centered not on golf courses, but on farms.

Of course, PlanCharlotte.org had an article on the phenomenon last April. Here’s Corbin Peters’ report on a hoped-for agriburbia development in Granite Quarry in Rowan County, “Putting a local food twist on suburbia.”

But there’s an interesting dilemma for developers and potential residents alike to ponder. Will the budding enthusiasm for “healthy living” on suburban farms take into account the growing body of research showing that long commutes by car can hurt people’s health? As I sat listening to Runyon’s report on WFAE, I was reading this report from the New York Times’ Jane Brody in the morning Charlotte Observer: “Commuting takes a high toll on your health.”

As Brody writes:
“A recent study of 4,297 Texans compared their health with the distances they commuted to and from work. It showed
that as these distances increased, physical activity and cardiovascular fitness dropped, and blood pressure, body weight, waist circumference and metabolic risks rose.

“The report, published last year in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, provided causal evidence for earlier findings that linked the time spent driving to an increased risk of cardiovascular death. It revealed that driving more than 10 miles one way, to and from work, five days a week was associated with an increased risk of developing high blood sugar and high cholesterol.”

Will fresh, extremely local food grown for agriburbia residents make up for those long commutes (assuming residents aren’t working at home)?

And as plenty of people from author and New Yorker magazine writer David Owens (Green Metropolis) to Harvard’s free-market economist Ed Glaeser (Triumph of the City) have pointed out, the carbon footprint of people who live in dense neighborhoods in cities is dramatically lower than even the more energy efficient house in the suburbs.

What’s “healthy”? What’s “green”? 

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/12/16/4549244/the-hidden-cost-of-commuting.html#.Uq93OY1Q1PE#storylink=cpy

Agriburbia? Tell that to Detroit

My earlier posting on “agriburbia” – saying “Agriculture is the new golf” and reporting on an in-the-works development near here that will feature farm fields instead of a golf course or – brought an e-mail with this link to a story from the online Detroit Free Press.

It seems some visiting urban planners, noting the enlarging areas of disinvestment in the Motor City, have proposed that eventually the city will resemble clusters of villages surrounded by farmlands. Back to the future, indeed.

Does anyone know of any urban land that has successfully reverted to farmland?

I asked a soil specialist some years back about the feasibility of turning abandoned big-box stores and their huge parking lots back into farmland and was told that, unfortunately, the development scrapes away the topsoil, which takes centuries to create. Maybe with enough chickens and livestock one could replenish the soil?

‘Agriculture is the new golf’

The latest career advice, I hear, isn’t “plastics.” It’s “agriburbia.”

A developer-land planner-type pulled me aside this week to talk about his newest project: A development, in the general vicinity of Kannapolis-Salisbury, that they’re dubbing “agriburbia.” It’s a residential development but instead of common open space and big lawns, they’ll have a civic farm, land leased to a farmer. There will be do-it-yourself options for backyard gardeners. They’ll market it, he said, to people affiliated with the N.C. Research Campus in Kannapolis – the health-and-wellness related research operation.

The term “agriburbia,” he said, was coined by a guy in Colorado. Sure enough, here’s the Web site. “Agriburbia” is even trademarked. But it’s such a great word it may have a life of its own, like “locavore.” Its slogan: “Growing Sustainable Communities by the Bushel!” Its goal: “the re-integration of food production directly within the living environment … by focusing on agriculture as the centerpiece of both new and existing communities.”

This dovetails with a talk in Charlotte last fall by New Urbanism godfather Andres Duany, about what he termed “agricultural urbanism.” It was Duany who quipped “agriculture is the new golf.” By that, he meant an activity and marketing point for developments.

“Only 17 percent of people living in golf course communities play golf more than once a year,” Duany said. “Why not grow food? By the way, food is very good-looking.” (I wonder if Duany, an urbane Miamian, has ever seen fading tomato plants at the end of a hot, aphid-ridden summer, or squash plants wilting from vine borer assaults. But I digress.)

Duany suggested the $40 billion that Americans spend on lawn care might be better diverted to food production. And this may be the biggest eyebrow-raiser, coming from a devoted urbanist devoted it to agriculture: “The large lot (as in large-lot suburbia) can be justified primarily as the making of food.” When Duany is trying to justify large-lot suburbia, you know the world is changing.

Being Andres Duany, he even came up with a “transect” (translation: context-appropriate designs) for agriculture in a range of conditions from rural (your basic farms, with farming village clusters) to center city (container gardens on terraces and rooftops). His transect has specific allowances for how many chickens are allowed – though no cluckers in the most dense urban neighborhoods. If memory serves, you can’t have a rooster unless you’re in one of the more rural zones in his transect. Whatever.

The local developers said they’ll be going public in a few weeks. Theirs isn’t “agricultural urbanism,” they said, but suburbia with farms instead of big lawns. Stay tuned.