Supporting Urban Agriculture:

A Proposed Supplement to the City of Detroit Master Plan of Policies.

Prepared for the City of Detroit Department of Planning and Development.
By Jonathan D. Lachance, Master of Urban Planning Candidate,
University of Michigan Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning.

April 2004.

The author welcomes questions, criticisms, and suggestions for improvements to this
document. Please send email to: jlachanc@umich.edu
Table of Contents.

Acknowledgments…………………………………...2
I. Background
A. Introduction………………………………………3
B. Definition of Urban Agriculture………………….3
C. Different Types of Urban Agriculture……………4
D. Benefits of Urban Agriculture……………………8

II. Urban Agriculture in Detroit

A. Vacant Land: Problems and Opportunities……….9
B. Land Use Conflicts……………………………….10

III. Recognizing & Supporting Urban Agriculture: Goals, Objectives, and Policies
Section Introduction………………………………….13
A. Objectives and Action Items…………….………..13
B. Draft Policy Language…………………………....15
1. Resolution in Support of Urban Agriculture...15
2. Urban Agriculture Ordinance……………..…16
3. Leasing City land for urban agriculture…..….19

Bibliography………………………………………….23

Appendices:
I. City of Seattle P-Plot program information and application form & language in support
of urban agriculture.
II. City of Portland, OR zoning language related to urban agriculture
III. List of Detroit urban agriculture contacts

Supporting Urban Agriculture 1

Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the contributions of the following individuals and
organizations without whose input and support the creation and completion of this
document would not have been possible:

Professor Margi Dewar, University of Michigan Taubman College of Architecture and

Urban Planning

Eric Dueweke, University of Michigan, Detroit Community Partnership Center, Taubman

College of Architecture & Urban Planning

Ashley Atkinson, Detroit Agricultural Network

Dr. Martin Bailkey, University of Wisconsin – Madison

John Baran, City Planner, Detroit Planning and Development Department

Michael Boettcher, City Planner, Detroit Planning and Development Department

John Gruchala, Foundation for Agricultural Resources in Michigan

Dr. Harrison Gardener, Foundation for Agricultural Resources in Michigan

Jeff Kahan, AICP, Planner II, City of Ann Arbor, Michigan

Dr. Jerome Kaufman, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Rich Macdonald, P-Patch Program Coordinator, City of Seattle Department of

Neighborhoods

Tim Palazzolo, City Planner, Detroit Planning and Development Department

Dr. Kameshwari Pothukuchi, Assistant Professor of Geography and Urban Planning,

Wayne State University

Brother Rick Samyn, Earth Works Garden, Detroit

Supporting Urban Agriculture 2

I. Background
This section explains the purpose of the Urban Agriculture Supplement, defines urban
agriculture, and describes different models of urban agriculture and some of its benefits.

A. Introduction
Urban agriculture (UA) helps the City of Detroit by reducing urban blight,
providing educational opportunities, and improving access to fresh produce. Although
many Detroit residents are actively involved in UA activities, the City of Detroit does not
have any policies that acknowledge urban agriculture as a legitimate land use. Because
urban agriculture operates in a policy vacuum, land use conflicts can arise between
citizens engaged in urban agriculture and the City’s agencies when there is a
disagreement over how lots should be used, or a lack of communication between the
City’s agencies and urban gardeners about how they are currently being used. For
example, the City may inadvertently destroy a community garden, or City staff may take
an indifferent or hostile approach to dealing with community groups involved in urban
agriculture when those groups use vacant land for gardening activities.
The following supplement to the City of Detroit Master Plan of Policies explains
UA’s background and benefits, how Detroit’s citizens use it to revitalize their
neighborhoods and make productive use of vacant lots, and why UA deserves to be
recognized by the City of Detroit as a legitimate land use. The supplement then proposes
a general policy approach that the City could adopt in order to encourage and support UA.
The supplement also includes examples of resolutions and ordinances that the City could
adopt in order to define and codify the rights and responsibilities of urban gardeners.
B. Definition of Urban Agriculture
City dwellers in North America and abroad are recognizing the benefits of
localized, small-scale agriculture in the city. In part, this movement is a response to
unmet demand for nutritious foods in underserved areas. Lower income people in city
centers are cultivating everything from vegetables to fish in order to meet their own food
needs or to foster a livelihood where economic opportunities may be scarce. 1 Urban
agriculture is becoming increasingly popular across the United States as citizens, city

1
See Bailey and Kaufman 2000, pp23-53, for case studies of entrepreneurial urban agriculture.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 3

planners, non-profit organizations, and governments become aware of its benefits. In
particular, governments and citizens are recognizing urban agriculture as a means of
cleaning and beautifying vacant lots for use as community space.
For the purposes of this document urban agriculture is defined as:
the production of fruits, vegetables, livestock, flowers and
other natural food and non-food materials within or near
the limits of a city, especially on vacant lots, in open spaces
such as parks, and in enclosed, indoor facilities such as
greenhouses or aquaculture systems.

C. Different Types of Urban Agriculture.

Most urban agriculture projects belong to one of the following types:

• Confederation of Gardeners: An informal network of individual gardeners or

groups of gardeners who either use the food they produce for their own
consumption or give the food to other people. CG farmers may share a single
large garden, or they may use several scattered lots. CG farmers are usually very
small scale. They tend to pool their resources and share knowledge in an informal
manner. A confederation of gardeners may have a coordinator who assists them
with obtaining land-use rights, purchasing bulk seeds, applying for grants, or
learning effective gardening techniques. Community garden plots leased on city-
owned land or privately held lots, organized and managed by non-profit
neighborhood or city-wide gardening groups are typical of the CG model of urban
agriculture.
In some cities a designated representative of a city agency may be
responsible for assigning lots or educating gardeners on techniques. For example,
in Seattle, Washington, the Department of Neighborhoods’ staff coordinates the
P-Patch community garden program, which includes 65 gardens and almost 2,000

Supporting Urban Agriculture 4

 gardeners. P-Patch participants pay annual fees that go to support P-Patch staff
and other program expenses. 2

• Formal Altruistic (FA): The FA model of urban agriculture uses agricultural

activities as a means to provide services to people in a particular area or
neghborhood. FA agricultural endeavors are established with specific service-
oriented goals in mind. An FA organization may use farming as a means to teach
local young people important skills, or to enable youth and elderly community
members to interact in productive ways. The FA organization might also
distribute the food they produce gratis to soup kitchens or to WIC recipients in
exchange for food stamps. FA organizations rely at least in part on money from
grants. Because they have organizational missions and they tend to rely more on
centralized locations and leadership, they are often incorporated non-profit
organizations or parts of non-profit ventures. FA organizations may generate
revenue from various activities to pay for organizational expenses. For example,
Food from the ‘Hood, a Los-Angeles based educational agriculture program,
gives children from the inner city the opportunity to learn about food production,
processing, and marketing. The children grow fruits and vegetables and use them
to make salsa and other value-added products that they distribute and sell in
grocery stores. The revenues from these products are reinvested in the
organization. The Food from the ‘Hood model has been successfully replicated in
Chicago, and similar programs have sprung up in other cities.3

• Formal For Profit (FP): FP models are enterprises in business to make money.
While they may rely on empowerment zone grants or seed money for initial
capital investment and operating costs, their ultimate goal is to be self-sufficient.
FP agriculture involves private companies operating on the footprints of former
industrial sites, such as Village Farms, Buffalo, a hothouse tomato company that

2
Telephone conversation with Rich McDonald, P-Patch Program Coordinator for the City of Seattle. See Appendix 1 for information
on Seattle’s P-Patch program. See also the City of Seattle Department of neighborhoods website for more information about the P-
Patch program: http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/ppatch/
3
See Kaufman and Bailkey 2000 for case studies of Formal Altruistic urban agricultural projects.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 5

 operated for three years in Buffalo, New York.4 FP urban agriculture operations
must abide by local and state regulations pertaining to businesses. Unlike the CG
and FA models of urban agriculture, the FP model only directly benefits those
individuals who have a financial stake in the enterprise; benefits that accrue to the
community are secondary.

This document deals exclusively with the Confederation of Gardeners model and
the Formal Altruistic model, and excludes Formal For Profit urban agriculture because
CG and FA are different from FFP in several important ways. First, CG and FA urban
agriculture are grassroots activities. As such, they operate on small parcels of land and
usually on small budgets. CG and FA are not organized around profit-generating business
models; in fact, none of Detroit’s existing urban farms are profitable.5 In essence, people
undertake CG and FA activities in order to improve their neighborhoods, create enjoyable
public space, or provide educational opportunities to organization members or the public.
Even when organizations engage in CG and FA urban agriculture on private land,
their activities are usually open to anyone who wants to participate. Some human services
organizations that engage in FA urban agriculture limit participation to their clients, but
these activities are also educational in nature.6 On the other hand, FFP urban agriculture
projects are rent-generating businesses that are not open to the public, and their primary
mission is to realize a profit. While FFP urban agriculture can contribute to neighborhood
revitalization by reusing vacant lots and creating jobs, it does not provide the same
educational and empowerment benefits as the CG and FA models.
Finally, FFP urban agriculture is regulated in accordance with the City of
Detroit’s rules on agricultural and horticultural businesses. 7 Currently, the City has
neither rules, nor policy, nor an official stance toward small-scale, not-for-profit urban
agriculture.

4
Kaufman and Bailkey 2000, pp. 18-20; Kaufman and Bailkey 2003, pp 8-9
5
Stohr.
6
See the case study of Re-vision Urban Farm in Kaufman and Bailey 2000, pp. 46-47.
7
Detroit Code of Ordinances, Sec. 57-3-19. Required for Landscape Gardening, Tree Work, Sale of
Nursery Stock, Etc. Agriculture-type businesses in Detroit are governed by the Consumer Affairs Dept.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 6

D. Benefits of Urban Agriculture.
Urban agriculture has a number of positive benefits for the people who are
involved in it. Participants experience “soft” benefits from participating in urban
agriculture, such as enjoyment of the outdoors, exercise, learning about gardening and
nature, working with friends and neighbors on improving their neighborhood, and
enjoying the health benefits of fresh vegetables and other garden products.8
Additionally, urban gardeners recognize that their agricultural activities can
contribute to the sense of empowerment that comes from putting vacant lots to good use.
Several groups of urban gardeners in Flint, Michigan have used community gardens to
improve the physical appearance and safety of their neighborhoods.9
Urban gardeners can also realize different positive economic benefits from
participating in urban agriculture. Some organized not-for-profit urban agriculture
projects pay their members, thereby contributing to local economic development. Young
people who participate in urban agriculture also learn horticulture, marketing, and other
job skills.10
City governments can also realize some benefits from urban agriculture. Annual
costs for maintaining city park space are much higher than the cost of maintaining an
urban garden. 11 Where community groups and non-profits pay the costs of their own
urban agriculture activities and the upkeep of the land on which it is located, the City
saves 100 percent on maintenance costs of the parcels in question.

8
Pothukuchi and Bickes, p. 4. See also Alaimo and Hassler.
9
Alaimo and Hassler.
10
Pothukuchi and Bickes, p. 6.
11
Pothukuchi and Bickes, p. 7.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 7

II. Urban Agriculture in Detroit
This section describes the current state of urban agriculture in the City of Detroit and the
problems caused by the lack of recognition/support of urban agriculture.

A. Vacant Land: Problems and Opportunities

Vacant land creates numerous problems for the City of Detroit. Since 1950,
Detroit has lost about half of its population and over 150,000 residential units.12 As a
result, Detroit contains between 40,000 and 65,000 vacant lots.13,14 Vacant lots detract
from the quality of life in the city’s neighborhoods. They create health and safety
problems if people use them for dumps or if they are “brownfield” sites contaminated by
toxic waste. 15 These lots also represent a considerable cost burden to the city; the
Department of Public Works also must spend $2.2 million annually cleaning them.16
Through urban agriculture, Detroit residents have been proactive in turning the
problems created by vacant lots into opportunities for neighborhood revitalization.
Around 1,000 Detroiters are actively involved in urban agriculture.17 An estimated 500 to
600 community gardens or urban farms exist in Detroit right now. Most of these projects
consist of small vegetable gardens, although some larger farms on scattered sites produce
honey, eggs, and small amounts of meat.18
A handful of non-profit organizations serve as umbrella organizations that
coordinate and publicize gardening activities and provide their members with gardening
instruction and access to horticultural and agricultural education organizations such as the
Detroit Master Gardeners’ Club and Michigan State University Extension Programs.
Perhaps the largest such organization in Detroit is the Detroit Agriculture Network
(DAN). DAN has between 230 and 300 active members who farm on gardens throughout
the city. The garden lots range in size from one single house lot to an entire acre. DAN

12
Bonham et al. p. 4.
13
Stohr pegs the number at 40,000, while Bonham et al. state that there are 65,000. Stohr; Bonham et al.,
p. 8.
14
Stohr.
15
Bonham et al. p. 9.
16
Stohr.
17
Stohr; email communication with Ashley Atkinson, Detroit Agriculture Network Coordinator.
18
Stohr.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 8

teaches its members gardening techniques, obtains grants to purchase basic materials for
gardening activities, and distributes newsletters containing gardening tips and
information about gardening-related activities to its members.
Another example of urban agriculture’s success in Detroit is the Earth Works
Garden at the Capuchin Soup Kitchen. Capuchin Brother Rick Samyn coordinates 500
volunteers in growing over 2,000 lbs. of vegetables each year for distribution to Food
Stamp recipients through the WIC Project Fresh Program19 and for use in the Capuchin
Soup Kitchen. Brother Samyn uses the proceeds from sales of the produce to cover
garden expenses.20 Organizations including the MSU Extension service support the Earth
Works Garden with agricultural education and technical assistance.21 The Earth Works
Garden is a member of the Detroit Agricultural Network.
The City of Detroit Recreation Department is also involved in urban agriculture
through the Farm-A-Lot program. The Farm-A-Lot program’s goal is to facilitate the
reuse of vacant city-owned lots for agriculture. Farm-A-Lot provides soil tilling services
and free seeds to residents interested in using vacant lots in their neighborhoods for
growing vegetables. However, most urban agriculture participants do not rely solely on
Farm-A-Lot for their gardening needs, since it is not always able to respond to them in a
timely manner.22

B. Land Use Conflicts

Although hundreds of Detroiters are using urban agriculture to reinvigorate and
beautify their neighborhoods, provide their children with learning opportunities, and
grow nutritious food, Detroit’s government has not recognized urban agriculture as a
legitimate land use in either its Master Plan of Policies or in its Official Zoning
Ordinances. Some City officials who are aware of urban agriculture activities are
skeptical of its benefits, since traditional notions of ‘highest and best uses’ of land usually
preclude non-rent generating activities.23,24 In some cases, verbal agreements that urban

19
Telephone conversation with Brother Rick Samyn.
20
Stohr.
21
Earth Works Garden Website.
22
Pothukuchi and Bickes, p. 40.
23
Quon, p. 24.
24
Stohr.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 9

agriculture practitioners make with City officials about using City property for urban
agriculture have fallen apart when those officials leave their positions. 25 Urban
agriculture is not a recognized activity in the Department of Recreation, which runs the
Farm-A-Lot program. Since urban agriculture is neither officially encouraged nor
forbidden by the City, it continues in a policy vacuum.28
The City of Detroit has not established rules regarding the use of lots for urban
agriculture. This lack of policy results in avoidable land use conflicts. For example, if
City agencies responsible for maintaining or keeping track of vacant parcels do not know
that land is being used as a garden, then they might inadvertently destroy the garden. In
the past, the Department of Public Works mistook an urban garden for an overgrown lot
and destroyed it.29 As a result, the Department of Public Works expended resources on
the destruction of a project that was benefiting Detroit residents. The caretakers of the
ruined garden and the Department of Public Works would have benefited from a policy
that recognized the garden as a legitimate land use and established a mechanism for
alerting the Department of Public Works to the existence of the garden.
Without rules to guide practitioners of CG and FA models of urban agriculture,
city farming can also create hazards and nuisances. For example, if people involved in
urban agriculture use toxic fertilizers or dispose of livestock waste inappropriately, these
activities can be detrimental to citizens’ health and quality of life.30
The intention of implementing urban agriculture policies is not to eliminate all
risk of land use conflicts, since some incidence of conflict is unavoidable. Rather, urban
agriculture policies should seek to minimize the risk of land use conflicts by creating a
codified framework that establishes ground rules for conducting urban agriculture
activities and dealing with competing or conflicting land use interests.

Urban agriculture is thriving in Detroit. It is becoming recognized as a way to

beautify vacant land, produce healthy food, and create new, low-cost opportunities for

25
Telephone conversation with Brother Rick Samyn.
28
Email communication with Timothy Palazzolo, City Planner, City of Detroit.
29
Stohr.
30
Quon, p. 8.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 10

learning and community gathering. Despite the benefits that urban agriculture brings to
Detroit’s neighborhoods, urban gardeners currently conduct their activities at their own
risk. The lack of a citywide policy regarding urban agriculture increases the likelihood of
conflict between urban gardeners and City agencies responsible for the maintenance of
the city’s land assets. Given the positive effects of urban agriculture on the city’s
physical landscape and among its citizens, it would make more sense for these City
agencies and urban agriculture practitioners to enter into a cooperative relationship. The
following section discusses some ways that the Detroit Department of Planning and
Development and the Detroit Planning Commission can contribute to such a relationship.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 11

III. Recognizing & Supporting Urban Agriculture: Goals, Objectives, & Policies
This section proposes a series of steps that the Planning and Development Department
and the Planning Commission can take toward recognizing and supporting urban
agriculture efforts.

As described above, urban agriculture is a unique and valuable land use that
combines community open space with productive gardening activities on vacant lots.
Many Detroit residents and non-profit organizations participate in urban agriculture for a
host of aesthetic, social, and educational benefits. However, because urban agriculture is
neither explicitly recognized nor regulated as a land use, it can sometimes result in land
use conflicts.
In order to prevent these conflicts, encourage Detroit’s citizens to pursue the
benefits of urban agriculture, and promote the physical revitalization of Detroit’s
neighborhoods through the creation of quality community spaces, the City of Detroit
should strive toward the goal of promoting and supporting urban agriculture. Below are
some objectives and action items that will help the City accomplish this goal.

A. Objectives & Action Items

1) Officially recognize urban agriculture as a legitimate land use. Acknowledging
urban agriculture’s role as a land use in the City of Detroit will be a positive first
step toward supporting urban agriculture and preventing land use conflicts that
occur when urban agriculture organizations develop gardens without official
sanction. The following are some possible actions that City agencies could take in
support of urban agriculture:
• Pass a resolution in the City Council in support of urban agriculture. (See
proposed resolution language)
• Implement zoning ordinances that will either allow urban agriculture as an
accessory use in residential areas or facilitate the creation of overlay zoning for
urban agriculture. The language could be drafted by the Planning and
Development Department and negotiated with the City Planning Commission.
(See proposed ordinance language as well as Appendices I and II)
• Identify the locations of existing gardens and potential sites for future gardens.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 12

 2) Develop a cooperative relationship between the City and the urban agriculture
community.
• Designate an urban agriculture contact in the Planning and Development
Department who will serve as a liaison between the City’s other agencies and
urban agriculture organizations and help urban agriculture organizations identify
locations for new urban agriculture projects.

3) Facilitate the growth of urban agriculture as a land use.

• Establish a system for leasing or selling City-owned lots to urban agriculture
organizations and individuals. The Planning and Development Department could
administer this system, or it could outsource the administrative functions of the
leasing program to an organization with established competencies in land
management and/or urban agriculture activities. This system could either serve as
an extension of, or a replacement for the Farm-A-Lot program. (See proposed
language)
• Establish standards for the inclusion of urban agriculture and other public or
community space in new residential developments.
• Create incentives such as density bonuses for developers who include urban
agriculture space in new residential developments or who preserve existing urban
agriculture spaces in their development plans. The Planning and Development
Department could draft the language for these requirements.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 13

B. Draft Policy Language
The following section includes proposed language that the City Council of Detroit could
adopt in order to advance the goal of supporting and encouraging urban agriculture. (See
theppendices for examples of language that other American cities have adopted in
support of urban agriculture.)

1. Resolution in Support of Urban Agriculture

The following is proposed language that could be adopted by City Council in order to
show official support for urban agriculture.

WHEREAS The City of Detroit officially recognizes the value of urban agriculture in
helping City residents improve the quality of life in their communities, increase their
access to fresh produce, enhance the aesthetics and security of their neighborhoods, and
create opportunities for recreation, community building, and enjoying the outdoors,
The City of Detroit hereby pledges to support community urban agriculture efforts by:
- Acknowledging the right of existing urban agriculture projects on private
land to continue undisturbed, as long as they operate in a manner that does
not create nuisances or health hazards (in accordance with Section 37-1-3
of the Detroit Code of Ordinances, “Authority of Public Health Director to
Declare a Nuisance and Abate the Same”);
- Encouraging organizations and individuals involved in urban agriculture
projects on City-owned land to negotiate with the Planning and
Development Department for the right to continue using those parcels.
- Encouraging the Planning and Development Department to develop
cooperative relationships with neighborhood organizations involved in
urban agriculture, and help those organizations identify parcels for use in
urban agriculture.
- Encouraging the adoption into the Detroit Code of Ordinances an Urban
Agriculture accessory use category that will set forth guidelines for the
practice of urban agriculture in the City of Detroit.

Adopted this _____day of ______, 2004

Supporting Urban Agriculture 14

2. Urban Agriculture Ordinance
The following is proposed language for an urban agriculture district. It could be included
in the Code of Ordinances as an addition to the Detroit Zoning Ordinance in order to
codify urban agriculture as a land use. This is only a rough draft and is not intended to
serve as a definitive ordinance. Suggestions for areas in need of expansion and/or
elaboration are included in parentheses. The author recommends that the Planning
Commission seek public involvement in the development of this ordinance, and that
enforcement of this ordinance be performed in cooperation with urban agriculture
activity coordinators.

This document does not deal with the sale or distribution of food produced on residential
lots. If some urban agriculture endeavors seek to distribute or process their products,
then applicable state and federal regulations should be investigated.

UA - Urban Agriculture District.

XX.0000. This district is designed to allow the small-scale production of natural products,
such as fruits, vegetables, flowers, honey, cheese, and meat on open land in the City of
Detroit, in particular on vacant city lots that are currently zoned for residential use in
areas where there is little pressure for housing development. The regulations for this
district are designed to encourage the productive use of vacant land for community and
educational uses focused around gardening and other agricultural activities.

XX.0100. Uses permitted as a matter of right.

XX.0101. Cultivation of vegetables, flowers, fruits and other plants in the ground, in
raised beds, and in greenhouses.

XX.0102. Raising of small numbers of livestock for meat and milk products. (The precise
number could be determined on an animal per area basis)

XX.0103. Production of bee honey.

XX.0104. Production of eggs.

XX.0200. Certain activities prohibited.

XX.0201. Use of insecticides made from synthetic chemical materials is forbidden.

Acceptable alternatives that may be applied in accordance with established safe handling
instructions such as those found on product labels include: rotenone, pyrethrin, and Safer
Soap. (This could also be changed to prohibit the use of certain pesticides. Best practices
established by Master Gardener organizations or MSU Extension could be used as
guidelines in establishing the correct amounts and methods of application.)

XX.0202. The use of herbicides and weed killers is prohibited.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 15

XX.0203. Composting of animal flesh is prohibited. (Composting meat can attract rats.
Again, existing best practices should dictate whether this remains.)

XX.0204. Production of intoxicating or poisonous plants is forbidden.

XX.0205. Tires may not be stored on garden sites. (Tires can transmit the toxic heavy
metals lead and cadmium into soils.)

XX.0300. Procurement of water.

XX.0301. Procurement of water from public supplies should be negotiated between the
Department of Public Works and the individual or organization conducting agricultural
activities on the site.

XX.0302. Use of private sources of water, such as water delivered through a hose from a
spigot attached to a participant’s house, is permitted.

XX.0400. Structures and barriers.

XX.0401. Structures necessary for the proper pursuit of gardening and the storage of
gardening equipment, including storage sheds, tool sheds, greenhouses, and like
structures will be permitted as long as they meet existing standards for safety as
mentioned elsewhere in the Code of Ordinances.

XX.0402. Individuals and organizations using lots for urban agriculture are permitted to
erect chain-link or picket fences, gates, or other similar barriers around the lots under
cultivation.

XX.0500. Animals - refer to Chapter 6 of the City of Detroit Code of Ordinances for
rules regarding treatment, handling, and keeping of animals.

XX.0600. Toxic or flammable chemicals.

XX.0601. Gasoline used for the operation of lawnmowers or other combustion engine-
driven gardening machinery must be kept in sealed containers in locked, ventilated
structures.

XX.0602. Chemicals such as rodenticides must be handled according to either Chapter 24,
Article VI (Rodent and Pest Control) of the City of Detroit Code. These chemicals shall
not be stored on the gardening site, and shall be kept in closed containers that will
prevent them from coming into contact with food. (This should be determined by
examining established best practices for rodenticide application – rat traps and rat
deterrence techniques are probably safer methods of controlling rodents.)

XX.0603. Pesticides and herbicides. See sections XX.0201 and XX.0202 of this
ordinance

Supporting Urban Agriculture 16

XX.0605. No flammable materials or other chemicals except the permitted chemicals
mentioned above may be used or stored in an Urban Agriculture Zone.

XX.0700. Machinery.

XX.0701. Tractors, lawnmowers, and other farm-related machinery may be used and
stored in Urban Agriculture zones as long as they are in good working order and do not
create a nuisance as defined elsewhere in the City of Detroit Code of Ordinances.

XX.0800. Prevention of growth of poisonous or injurious weeds.

XX.0801. Parties using or otherwise occupying urban agriculture zones are responsible
for preventing the growth of those weeds defined as “poisonous or injurious” in Section
57-5-1 of the City of Detroit Code of Ordinances.

XX.0900. Handling and preparation of food for sale – refer to Chapter 21 of the City of
Detroit Code of Ordinances for rules regarding food and food establishments. These rules
are to apply to Urban Agriculture zones where parties involved in agriculture activities
seek to sell food within the zone.

XX.1000. Soil dangers and toxicity.

XX.1001. Before any food products may be grown in topsoil in an Urban Agriculture
zone, such soil must be tested for contaminants that would render it unsuitable for this
use, including, but not limited to: lead and other toxic heavy metals; industrial solvents;
gasoline; perclorethylene; and other chemicals that can be transmitted to people via soil
contact or consumption of foods grown in such soil.

XX.1002. Areas of dry, loose soil that may be moved by wind should be covered by
mulch or plastic or otherwise confined.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 17

3. Proposed process for leasing City-owned residential lots for urban agriculture use.
The following describes a possible system for leasing City-owned vacant residential lots
to individuals or organizations for the purpose of establishing a community garden,
including the responsibilities of lessees and agencies involved in the management of City-
owned land. This process does not apply to privately owned residential lots that the
owners are using or allowing others to use for urban agriculture. This is only an outline;
it is not meant to represent a complete leasing process.

The process as outlined below names the Planning and Development Department as the
responsible administrative agency for a leasing program. If the Planning and
Development Department lacks the capacity to take on the administration of the urban
agriculture leasing system, these responsibilities may be delegated to an intermediary
organization with established competencies in the management of City-owned land
and/or urban agriculture activities. Likely candidates for such an intermediary
organization include the Detroit Agricultural Network or a city land banking authority.

Ideally, this leasing system would be implemented in conjunction with the other policies
proposed in this supplement. This system could serve as an extension of, or replacement
for the City of Detroit’s existing Farm-A-Lot program, which is currently run by the
Detroit Recreation Department.

NOTE: Urban agriculture practitioners seeking a more permanent home for their
gardening activities should attempt to purchase vacant lots from the City. Leasing lots
from the City of Detroit does not guarantee permanent tenure.

In order to encourage the reuse of vacant City-owned residential lots for urban agriculture,
the City of Detroit is implementing a streamlined leasing system for such lots.

Basic Structure of Urban Agriculture Leases

1. Leases are for 5 to 7-year periods for the following reasons:
• Gardens generally take several growing seasons to reach peak productivity.
• Lessees would be able to make longer-term plans for developing community &
educational programming on the lot or lots in question.
• The City would experience lower administrative costs related to the leasing
process than if the leases were for shorter periods of time.
2. Lease applicants will be required to provide the following information on their
application:
• Their name or the organization’s name and address, telephone number, and other
contact information.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 18

 • If the applicant is an organization, the names, titles, and contact information of
individuals over age 18 who will be conducting or coordinating the activities on
the parcel(s).
• The address of the City-owned parcel(s) and the parcel number(s) and the general
location of the parcel(s)
• The size of the property or properties (dimensions and acreage, if known).
• A list of names, addresses and signatures of residents on adjacent plots who
support the use of the site for urban agriculture. If there are no neighbors
immediately adjacent to the parcels in question, the applicant should state this.
• Signature from a designated Planning and Development Department staff member
confirming that the parcel is vacant and City-owned.
• Signatures of all major parties who will be involved in cultivating the parcels
confirming that they:
o Agree to use the site for urban agriculture activities as set forth in the
Urban Agriculture Ordinance;
o Have tested the soil on the site through an established means of soil testing,
and have confirmed that it either contains levels of toxic contaminants at
or below the recognized “safe” level. (The applicant should attach a copy
of the soil test results to the application.) Or they:
o Will use elevated garden beds, hydroponic systems, or some other
growing system that does not use the soil on the parcel(s), if the soil
contains unsafe levels of contaminants. (The applicant should attach a
copy of the soil test results to the application.)
o Understand that their lease may be terminated in the event that a
residential development will be constructed on the parcel(s) in question,
and agree to remove their property from the site at the end of the growing
season when they are notified of the impending development.
o Agree to vacate the parcel(s) at the end of their lease unless they have a
lease renewal application pending.
3. As long as the form is completed in full and a new development is not pending on
the site, the Planning and Development Department will approve or deny lease

Supporting Urban Agriculture 19

 applications within one month of receiving a completed application. The
Commission will return the form with their decision to the Planning and
Development Department.
4. Approved leases would be recorded in the Planning and Development
Department.
5. At the end of the lease period, gardeners would either apply to renew the lease or
vacate the premises.
6. The Department of Planning and Development would reserve the right to end the
lease agreement in the event that:
• A new residential development has received approval from the Planning
Commission to be built on the site. In this situation, lessees would have until the
end of the current growing season (the period between March 1 and November 15)
to remove their property from the lot(s) in question.
• The lessee is in violation of City code specifically pertaining to the use of land for
urban agriculture. Where such code does not exist, other portions of City code
will not be applied in an arbitrary manner. The conditions for the termination of
the lease are described below.

Lease Applicant Responsibilities

1. Applicants must submit complete lease application forms to the Planning and
Development Department.
2. Applicants are responsible for paying all required application fees.
3. Applicants are responsible for following up with the Planning and Development
Department to learn of the status of their applications.

Lessee/Gardener Responsibilities
1. Lessees are responsible for ensuring that all activities they engage in on the leased
property are in conformance with applicable city laws and ordinances. (This could
include the proposed Urban Agriculture Ordinance in part III of this document if
it is adopted.)
2. Lessees are responsible for maintaining signage

Supporting Urban Agriculture 20

 3. Lessees are responsible for keeping track of the time remaining on their lease and
for submitting lease renewal materials at least one month before the end of their
lease.
4. Lessees are responsible for reporting problems, such as illegal dumping, water
supply problems, or vandalism, to the appropriate city agency.
5. Lessees are responsible for removing all of their property from the garden site at
the end of the lease or in the event of an early lease termination.

Administering Agency Responsibilities

1. The City department or other agency (the Agency) charged with administering the
leasing program will be responsive to lease applicants’ inquiries, and provide
them with information regarding the status of City-owned lots.
2. The Agency will confirm whether the parcel(s) in question is/are City-owned. A
representative of the Department will sign the lease application to confirm that the
parcel(s) is/are City-owned.
3. The Agency will process lease applications within a month and notify the
applicant of their decision.
4. The Agency will not terminate urban agriculture leases arbitrarily.
5. The Agency will provide lessees with official signage (a laminated placard or sign
announcing that the land is leased for urban agriculture uses) to display on the site.
6. The Agency will inform lessees in writing of any Planning Commission-approved
plans for development on the leased parcel(s)
7. The Agency will assist lease applicants in identifying alternative sites for gardens
in the event that their lease is terminated because of Planning Commission-
approved development plans for the site.
8. If possible, the Agency will maintain up-to-date records of leased lots, and create
a map system that identifies the locations of these lots.

Planning Commission Responsibilities

1. The Planning Commission will mediate any disputes between parties regarding
the use of City-owned lots for urban agriculture.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 21

Bibliography

Alaimo, Katherine and David Hassler, eds. From Seeds to Stories: The Community
Garden Storytelling Project of Flint. Flint Urban Gardening & Land Use Corporation,
Flint, 2003

Bonham, Blaine, Gerri Spilka & Darl Rastorfer. Old Cities/Green Cities - Communities
Transform Unmanaged Land. American Planning Association, Chicago, 2002.

Earth Works Garden website.

URL: http://home.earthlink.net/~lightwavz/ewgblog/id1.html
Accessed March 12, 2004

Kaufman, Jerry and Martin Bailkey. Farming Inside Cities: Entrepreneurial Urban
Agriculture in the United States. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, 2000.

Kaufman, Jerry and Martin Bailkey. Farming Inside Cities Through Entrepreneurial
Urban Agriculture - revised draft 10/31/03. Department of Urban and Regional Planning,
University of Wisconsin - Madison, 2003.

Mikolajewski, Matthew B. “Milwaukee Community Gardens - Current Trends and

Recommendations.” University of Wisconsin Milwaukee School of Architecture and
Urban Planning. May 2002.

Pothukuchi, Kami and Joan Bickes. “Hortaliza! Youth Nutrition Garden Demonstration
Project in Southwest Detroit.” Wayne State University, 2001.

Quon, Soonya. Planning for Urban Agriculture: A Review of Tools and Strategies for
Urban Planners. Cities Feeding People Series Report 28. International Development
Research Center, Ottawa,1999.

Raja, Samina “Preserving Community Gardens In a Growing Community: A report on

the Community Gardens Planning Process in Madison Wisconsin.” Madison Food
System Project, Madison, September 2002.

Stohr, Kate. “In the Capital of the Car, Nature Stakes a Claim.” The New York Times,
December 4, 2003, New York.

Supporting Urban Agriculture 22

APPENDICES
 APPENDIX I:
City of Seattle Department of Neighborhoods
2004 P-Patch Garden Application;
Seattle Municipal Code Language Regarding P-Patch program;
Comprehensive Plan Language in Support of Community Gardens.
 City of Seattle
Department of Neighborhoods
Yvonne Sanchez, Director
2004 APPLICATION & SURVEY ENCLOSED — RETURN BY FRIDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2003

Welcome to the 2004 gardening season. The renewal application is arriving early this year because, as you’ll read below,
we’ll be short staffed next year and want to wrap up the application process by the end of 2003. Thanks for your help.

All things considered 2003 was a good year for P-Patch. With the Friends of P-Patch, we celebrated our 30th anniversary
starting with a traditional horse plowing at Picardo and continuing with the wonderful city-wide P-Patch tours in July. New
sites seemed to sprout all over the city this year. Thyme Patch opened in the spring, Linden Orchard followed in July and the
year finishes with West Seattle’s Longfellow Creek and Lincoln Park close behind. Magnuson added hundreds of new plots,
while Snoqualmie got a makeover. In the meantime, construction began at Angel St P-Patch, at 42nd Ave S and S Angel. In
2004, Oxbow Park in Georgetown should begin construction and the newly acquired Maple Leaf near Northgate, will start a
public design process. Cultivating Communities is charging up Power Garden and will complete Yesler Terrace in 2004.

Unfortunately the City budget situation has forced us to make a few changes for next year. The staff position formerly held
by Wendy McClure will not be filled. Julie Bryan, Sandy Pernitz and Rich Macdonald will be the staff for 50 P-Patches next
year. Martha Goodlett, Bunly Yun and Anza Muenchow will manage Cultivating Communities, which also faces a budget
crunch due to reduced funding from Seattle Housing Authority. The staff vacancy is especially hard, because, according to
our joint Five Year Plan with Friends of P-Patch, 2004, with all the new gardens, would have been the year to add rather than
decrease staff.

A second change concerns plot fees. We hope the change simplifies payment and reduces confusion. This year you will
pay two fees:
1. an application fee of $20, and
2. a fee of $10 for each 100 square feet you garden. (100-square-foot (sf) plot will cost $30; a 200-sf, $40;
and 400-sf, $60).
• These fees include an increase to cover rising water costs.
• Please note that Plot Fee Assistance is available through Friends of P-Patch.

We plan one more administrative change. This year we will assign every gardener with email to the P-Patch listserve.
The listserve is a discussion group for sharing information and resources. Now in its second year the listserve has been
very successful and continues to grow. Staff will use it to post educational and gardening information. We believe that it
will limit the number of e-mails gardeners receive from the office and address concerns about disseminating e-mail
addresses. Gardeners can, of course, opt off the list by checking the appropriate box on the application. You can also
leave the list serve at any time.

As always we encourage you to become involved with Friends of P-Patch. Our partnership strengthens the program in
many ways. Friends acquires and owns P-Patches and acts as a fiscal agent for garden projects. Their site coordinator
committee is a forum for education, discussion and community, and a source of funds for both tools and small site
improvements. Our joint program, Cultivating Communities, which focuses on under-served communities, helps us
make sure that all communities have a chance to garden.

Please return this Application by Friday, October 31, 2003. Upon receipt, you will be mailed a postcard verifying payment.
Feel free to call or e-mail. The P-Patch staff person assigned to your garden is listed on the map page.

Rich Macdonald Rich.macdonald@seattle.gov 206-386-0088

Julie Bryan Julie.bryan@seattle.gov 206-233-7112
Martha Goodlett Martha.goodlett@seattle.gov 206-684-0540
Sandy Pernitz Sandy.pernitz@seattle.gov 206-684-0284
Bunly Yun Bunly.yun@seattle.gov 206-684-8495
Maria Rodriguez Maria.rodriguez@seattle.gov 206-684-5011
P-Patch Website www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/ppatch
General P-Patch E-mail P-Patch.don@seattle.gov
TTY/TDD 206-733-9595
Friends of P-Patch P.O. Box 19748, Seattle 98109 206-648-7353 vm
 P-Patch Community Garden Locations
North End P-Patches (north of the ship canal)
1 ◆● Jackson Park – 10th Ave NE & NE 133rd St – BE
2 ◆ Pinehurst – 12th Ave NE & NE 115th St – BE
3 Evanston – Evanston Ave N & N 102nd St – BE
4 ◆ Ballard – 25th Ave NW & NW 85th St – SP
5 ◆❤ Picardo Farm – 26th Ave NE & NE 82nd St – RM
6 ◆ Burke Gilman Gardens – 5200 Mithun Pl NE – SP
7 Magnuson – 7400 Sandpoint Wy NE – SP
8 Ravenna – 5200 Ravenna Ave NE – SP
9 Good Shepherd – Bagley Ave N & N 47th St – SP
10 ◆ University District – 8th Ave NE & NE 40th St – SP
17 ◆ University Heights – 5031 University Way NE – SP
24 Phinney Ridge – 3rd Ave NW & NW 60th St – SP
32 Fremont – N 39th & Woodland Park Ave N – SP
35 Greenwood – 345 NW 88th St – BE
37 ●◆ Haller Lake – 13045 1st Ave NE – SP
38 Greg’s Garden – 14th NW and NW 54th – SP
42 Roosevelt – 7012 12th Ave NE – BE
45 ◆ Thyme Patch Park – 28th NW & NW 58th – JB
48 Linden Orchard – Linden Ave N & N 67th – RM
52 ❏ Maple Leaf – 5th Ave NE & NE 103rd – RM
South End P-Patches (south of the ship canal)
11 ◆ Interbay – 15th Ave W & W Wheeler St – RM
12 ◆ Eastlake – 2900 Fairview Ave E – SP
13 Colman Park – 32nd Ave S & S Grand St – SP
14 Snoqualmie – 13th Ave S & S Snoqualmie St – JB
15 Ferdinand – Columbia Dr S & S Ferdinand St – JB
16 Delridge – 5078 25th Avenue SW – JB
18 Thistle – Martin Luther King Jr Wy & Cloverdale – JB
19 Judkins – 24th Ave S & S Norman St – SP
20 ◆ Republican – 20th Ave E & E Republican St – SP
21 Alki –2126 Alki Ave SW– JB
22 Bradner Gardens Park – 29th Ave S & S Grand St – JB 51 ❏ Morgan – S Morgan and 42nd Ave S – RM
23 Estelle Street – 3400 Rainier Ave S – SP 53 ❏ Oxbow Pk – Corson S & S Eddy – RM
25 Ida Mia – Madison & Lake WA Blvd (alley) – SP
26 Beacon Avenue – 2528 S Graham St – JB
27 Belltown – Elliott Ave & Vine St – RM Key
28 Queen Anne – 3rd Ave N & Lynn St – RM ♠ Communal plots (no individual gardening)
29 ◆ Hillman City – 46th Ave S & S Lucile St – JB ❤ Seasonal plots (Apr to Oct) available
30 ❏ Hiwatha Place – S Deaborn & Hiwatha Pl – SP z Priority for Seattle residents, Non-residents okay
31 Squire Park – 14th Ave & E Fir – SP ◆ Accessible raised beds available
33 Cascade – Minor Ave N and Thomas St – SP ❏ Construction in 2004-05, call to help
34 ◆ Thomas Street Gardens – 1010 E Thomas – SP
36 ● South Park – 4th Ave S and S Director – JB
39 ‹ Immaculate – 18th Ave E and E Columbia – SP
40 Courtland Place – 36th Ave S & S Spokane St – JB P-Patch Staff
41 ♠ Pelican Tea Garden – E Mercer at 19th Ave E – SP Phone (206)
JB Julie Bryan 233-7112
43 Mad P – 30th Ave E & E Mercer – SP
RM Rich Macdonald 386-0088
44 ◆ Queen Pea – 5th Ave N & Howe St – RM SP Sandy Pernitz 684-0284
46 Beacon Bluff – S Massachusetts at 15h Ave S – JB BE Bridget Enderle 615-1787
47 Longfellow Creek – 25th SW and SW Thistle -- JB (until 12/31/03)
49 ♠ Hillman Orchard – S Brandon & 47th Ave S -- RM
50 ❏ Lincoln Park-Fauntleroy Ave. SW & SW Webster-RM
RULES FOR P-PATCH PARTICIPANTS
They may look long, but remember common courtesy and organic gardening are key.
Compliance with these rules is important for keeping and renewing your plot.
1) PLOT USE & MAINTENANCE OF ADJACENT PATHS.
a) Use your plot: Actively garden throughout the year:
i) Plots must be planted by May 1, or in short season gardens, within two weeks of rototilling. Exceptions, however,
will be made for weather. During the garden season you must maintain your plot by planting, watering, harvesting,
weeding and soil building. After the gardening season, your plot must be prepared for the winter by any
combination of mulching, planting cover crop seeds or winter crop gardening.
ii) Maintaining your garden is your responsibility: If this year will be difficult for you, let us reassign your plot and
you will stay at the top of the waitlist to come in when you’re ready. If you need help watering or harvesting or in
the event of extraordinary circumstances affecting your ability to garden, please notify your site coordinator or
neighboring gardener.
iii) During the gardening season, P-Patch staff work with site coordinators to monitor plot usage. When plots are
untended (overgrown, weedy, un-harvested) for more than two weeks, gardeners will be contacted by phone or a
postcard and asked to take care of the plot by a certain date.
b) Do not expand your boundaries: Do not expand your P-Patch beyond its designated area. Keep invasive, vining and
spreading crops confined to your own plot. In short-season plots, comfrey and Jerusalem artichokes are not permitted.
c) Use caution with tall plants and structures: Please be careful that sunflowers, corn or tall trellised plants do not shade
your neighbor. You must call the office before building any structure taller than four feet. Trees and permanent
structures are generally not allowed in plots.
d) Paths are important: You must keep the common paths around your garden weeded and/or mulched. For safety, do
not dig into main paths; keep paths level, rock free, and wide for walking. Keep your own access paths fully within your
own plot unless you agree to share them with your neighbor.

2) NO INSECTICIDES OR HERBICIDES MAY BE USED. The P-Patch Program is for organic gardening only. The use
of insecticides made from synthetic chemical materials is strictly prohibited. Rotenone, pyrethrin, and Safer Soap are allowed
only when used according to label directions. Herbicides, or weed killers, are prohibited as well. Slug bait is permitted only in
enclosed containers, which must be removed from the site after use. Beer and sugar/yeast/water solutions serve as organic slug
bait. If you have questions, please contact your site coordinator or P-Patch staff.

3) P-PATCH COMMUNITY HOURS: EIGHT ARE REQUIRED.

a) At least four hours must be completed at your P-Patch site or by helping your P-Patch in some way (working your own plot
or adjacent paths does not count). Call your site coordinator for a task or see the Site Maintenance section of the enclosed
job list. The balance of hours may be fulfilled by generally benefiting P-Patch or Friends of P-Patch (see job list).
b) Completing your hours is your responsibility, as is recording your hours on the log sheet in your tool shed.
c) Hours are due by October 31. If you’re having problems, call the Program office, and we’ll find work for you.

4) MISCELLANEOUS
a) Smoking is prohibited in the gardens. Tobacco can transmit a lethal virus to tomatoes.
b) Loud radios are prohibited. Please consider headphones for your neighbors’ peace and quiet.
c) Tires are not allowed at the sites. They can release cadmium or lead into the garden.
d) Produce from your plot may not be sold.
e) Please treat hoses carefully and return when finished watering. If others are waiting to use the hoses, limit your time to 10
minutes. Sprinklers must be attended. Don’t water others’ plots without permission. Water service is off during the winter.
f) Well-mannered, leashed dogs are allowed within your own plot, unless complaints are received. Please remove scooped
poop. Dogs are not allowed at Good Shepherd and Thomas St. Gardens.
g) Closely supervise your children; help them learn respect for gardening and boundaries.
h) There is no garbage service. Please pick up trash and take it home for disposal.
i) Resolve differences in a neighborly way. For problems with fellow gardeners, stay polite and listen carefully; usually
solutions are easily reached. Verbal or physical abuse will not be tolerated. Contact your site coordinator or the P-Patch
office for more serious difficulties.

YOU AND YOUR FELLOW GARDENERS ARE CARETAKERS OF THE WHOLE GARDEN SITE.
PLEASE USE COMMON COURTESY.
 2004 P-PATCH RENEWAL APPLICATION
Please print FOR OFFICE USE
Site _______________
NAME_________________________________________________________________________________
list name of person to whom correspondence will be sent; only one per plot. Plot_______________ˆ DB
Plot Fee Assistance $_____
ADDRESS__________________________________________________ ZIP_________________________ FPP $________________
nine digits please ❏ Fee processed: Date_____
PHONE NUMBER Day________________________ Evening ____________________________
❏ receipt postcard (to 5/1)
❏ map
ADDITIONAL GARDENERS_____________________________________________________________ ❏ conf ltr: Date _________
(phone if different from above)
E-MAIL _______________________________________________________ ❏ All gardeners will be added to the P-Patch list serve,
our principal way to communicate general P-Patch
2nd E-MAIL_____________________________________________________
(if different) information, unless you check this box.

I WANT TO DO THE FOLLOWING:

❏ Keep my current garden plot(s) at ________________________ ❏ Keep current plot if I am unable to transfer
❏ Be reassigned to a different plot at the same P-Patch ❏ Give up current plot if unable to transfer, but stay on waitlist
❏ Be transferred to ____________________________ ❏ I will not be gardening in 2004
(transfers based on original waitlist date)

PROGRAM PLOT FEES Amount Friends of P-Patch Amount

(Plot fee includes $20 application fee enclosed Supporters
And $10 for each 100 sf gardened.
enclosed
Check square footage on envelope)
100 square feet (10’x10’) for $30 Friend: $25 to $34
200 square feet (10x20) for $40 Garden Helper: $35 to $49
300 square feet (10x 10 plus 10x20) for $50 Supporter: $50 to $99
400 square feet (10x40 plus 10 x 20) for $60 Contributor $100 to $249
Larger Plots: 600 sf = $80; 1000 sf = $120 Benefactor $250 to $499
Pelican Tea for $30 (communal garden) Patron: $500 to $999
Accessible raised beds: $10 per bed Gardening Angel $1000 and beyond
FPP Plot Fee Assistance (call P-Patch to Other
request.)
My employer will donate to match my :
____ time _____donation

TOTAL ENCLOSED $________________________ (Partial refunds until April 15, 2004; no refunds thereafter)
Make checks payable to P-Patch Program.

Return application and payment to P-Patch Program

700 3rd Avenue, 4th Floor
Questions? Call 684-0264. Seattle, WA 98104-1848
P-PATCH COMMUNITY HOURS. Part of your responsibility as a P-Patcher is to contribute eight hours to the program each year — four hours of
which must be worked at your P-Patch and the remaining four can be for other program activities (e.g., the P-Patch booth or helping in the office). To help
us match the tasks you’re interested in with the tasks that we may need people to do (some more in demand than others), indicate your preferences below,
using the numbers from attached Preference List to fill in the blanks. Site coordinators and office staff may contact you for specific tasks, but don’t wait to
be called — it is your responsibility to complete your eight hours. Ask your site coordinators how to report your hours.

Preference List (please complete, because we can not carry tasks over from year to year; and please fill in at least two items)
1) ____________ 2) ____________ 3) __________ 4) __________ other ___________ Expertise_____________
AGREEMENT: I have read the Rules for P-Patch Participants on the reverse and by signing agree to comply with them. I understand that failure to comply
with the rules and contribute my required eight P-Patch Community Hours may result in the cancellation of my application and/or reassignment of my plot
without refund of my fee. I understand that failure of any person assisting me in my plot to comply will also result in such actions by the P-Patch Program.

SIGNED__________________________________________________________________________________________

OPTIONAL AND HELPFUL ♥ For our information please tell us your profession. _________________________ and
employer ____________________. May we call you if we have questions in your area of employment: yes ___ no
___.
Seattle Comprehensive Plan Language in Support of Community Gardens
The City of Seattle, Washington has formally recognized community gardens as an
important land use in their Comprehensive Plan. The following are excerpts from Part 2
of the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Element. This language demonstrates the City’s
active approach to making community gardens an integral part of the City’s open and
public spaces. The author has put text of particular relevance in bold italics.

A. Open Space Network

Goals
LG83. Provide places for the people of Seattle to interact with others, and experience
repose, recreation, and natural beauty. Provide healthy play space for children and their
families; passive uses such as strolling, sitting, viewing, picknicking, public gathering,
and community gardening; and active uses such as competitive sports and running.
(…)
LG86. Enhance the urban village strategy through the following:
1. amenities in more densely populated areas;
2. recreational opportunities for daytime populations in urban centers
(…)
5. connections linking Urban Centers and Villages, through a system
of parks, boulevards, community gardens, urban trails, and natural areas
(…)
Public Projects (…)
L297. Promote inter-agency and intergovernmental cooperation to expand community
gardening opportunities, and include P-Patch community gardening among priorities
for use of City surplus property.

L300. Direct efforts to expand the open space network according to the following
considerations: (…)
2. Types of open space acquisitions and facility development:
a. Village open space sites, urban center indoor recreation facilities,
village common sites, and community gardens. (…)
Seattle Municipal Code Language Regarding P-Patch program.

SMC 3.35.080 Leases and agreements authorized.

The Director of Neighborhoods (Director) is authorized, for and on

behalf of The City of Seattle as lessee, to enter into, renew, modify
and administer leases and agreements to lease any property within The
City of Seattle for use as P-Patch community gardens or for similar
open space use. Such leases shall be on such terms and for such
periods, not to exceed five (5) years (exclusive of renewals at the
City's option), as the Director may find prudent or as may be
required by fund sources, provided that unless otherwise authorized
by ordinance the combination of all such leases and agreements shall
not commit the City to aggregate payments in any year in excess of
Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000). The Director is further authorized to
negotiate, accept, execute, record, administer, and enforce, for and
on behalf of the City, easements, covenants, or other agreements from
property owners and lessees, committing the use of land for P-Patch
purposes for specified periods or in perpetuity, provided that
without express City Council approval such agreements shall not
impose material obligations on the City with respect to the property
beyond those for which funds shall have been appropriated at the time
of such acceptance.

(Ord. 118546 Section 3, 1997: Ord. 118208 Section 1, 1996.)

SMC 3.35.060 Garden plot fee schedule; permits.

A. To partially offset the costs of the P-Patch program, the Director

of the Department of Neighborhoods ("Director") is authorized to
establish and collect fees for applications for, and for the use of,
P-Patch garden plots and to grant revocable permits for such use.
Fees shall include an application fee and a permit fee. The permit
fee shall vary in accordance with the size of garden plot used by the
program participant and shall generally be based on a standard unit
of one hundred square feet. Beginning January 1, 2004, the base
application fee shall be Twenty Dollars ($20) per year for any size
plot, and the base permit fee shall be Ten Dollars ($10) per year for
each standard unit or any part of a standard unit. These initial base
fees shall be subject to adjustments as authorized in subsections B,
C and D of this section. The Director may waive fees and allow
reductions from base fees as authorized in subsections E and F of
this section.

B. The Director shall adjust the base fees every two (2) years
approximately in proportion to the change in the Consumer Price
Index, All Urban Consumers, published by the federal government, or a
substitute or successor index selected by the Director. The first
such adjustment shall take effect January 1, 2005.

C. The Director also may increase base fees for any year to reflect
actual or expected increases in operating costs, including but not
limited to water, lease fees, or equipment maintenance, provided that
neither the base application fee nor the base permit fee for a
standard unit shall vary by more than five per cent (5%) from the
respective fee that would apply under subsections A and B of this
section.

D. The Director may establish reduced base application fees or base

permit fees, or both, for plots substantially smaller than a standard
unit, including accessible raised beds, so long as the total base
fees per square foot are no less than an amount generally consistent
with the total base fees per square foot for the standard unit.

E. The Director may accept a reduced permit fee from a participant

who is given access to a plot after a significant portion of the
growing season has expired, prorated to reflect the number of months
remaining in the growing season.

F. The Director may waive application fees or permit fees, or both,

or set reduced fees, for plots used by low-income persons, and for
organizations using plots dedicated to food bank gardening, otherwise
operated to benefit low-income persons, or dedicated to educational
purposes. If the Director waives or reduces fees under this section,
the Director shall adopt policies regarding the income levels
eligible for waivers or reduced fees, the types of organizations and
programs eligible for such waivers or reductions, and conditions of
eligibility, consistent with the intended public purposes for such
waivers and reductions. The Director may limit the amount of area for
which specified waivers or reductions may be allowed in order to
prevent undue impacts on the revenues of the program.

(Ord. 121341 Section 1, 2003; Ord. 120985 Section 1, 2002; Ord. 120171 Section 1,
2000; Ord. 118546 Section 1, 1997; Ord. 117397 Section 1, 1994; Ord. 115929 Section 1,
1991; Ord. 113738 Section 1, 1987; Ord. 109489 Section 1, 1980; Ord. 107833 Section 1,
1978; Ord. 106958 Section 1, 1997.)

Source: City of Seattle, Washington Website

http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~public/code1.htm
Accessed April 2004.
 APPENDIX III
City of Portland, OR Zoning Language
Pertaining to Urban Agriculture
The following are excerpts from the Code and Charter of the City of Portland, Oregon
that make specific reference to community gardens and agriculture. The author has
put particularly relevant passages in bold italics. Text in [brackets] are the author’s
comments.

Chapter 3.8 Special Permits.

3.80.020 – Use of Park Property for Private Gardening Purposes.

Park property not needed by the City for development may be used by private parties
for gardening purposes by obtaining a special permit. The bureau of parks is
authorized to issue revocable permits for such purpose and shall impose such
conditions as are necessary and advisable to protect the interests of the City. (…)

Chapter 33.920 Descriptions of the Use Categories

33.920.460 – Parks and Open Areas
A. Characteristics. Parks and Open Areas are uses of land focusing on
natural areas, large areas consisting mostly of vegetative landscaping or
outdoor recreation, community gardens, or public squares. Lands tend
to have few structures. (…)

[Note: Parks and Open Areas uses, which include community gardens, are allowed by
right or are a conditional use in each of Portland’s Base Zones: Open Space Zone
(33.100.100), Single-Dwelling Residential Zones (33.100.110), Multi-Dwelling
Residential Zones (33.100.120), Commercial Zones (33.100.130), and Employment
and Industrial Zones (33.100.140).]

33.920.500 – Agriculture
A. Characteristics. Agriculture includes activities that raise, produce, or
keep plants or animals
(…)
C. Examples. Examples include breeding or raising of fowl or other animals;
dairy farms; stables; riding academies; kennels or other animal boarding places;
farming; truck gardening; forestry; tree farming; and wholesale plant nurseries.
D. Exceptions.
 1. Processing of animal or plant products, including milk, and feed
lots, are classified as Manufacturing and Production.
2. Livestock auctions are classified as Wholesale Sales/
3. Plant nurseries that are oriented to retail sales are classified
as Retail Sales and Service.
(…)

[Note: Agricultural uses are considered a Primary Use in Portland’s: Open Space
Zone (33.100.100), and Employment and Industrial Zones (33.100.140). ), In Single-
Dwelling Residential Zones (33.100.110), Agriculture uses are a primary use in two
types of Single Residential Zones including the Residential Farm/Forest Zone type.
Agriculture uses are a conditional use in 3 of the 8 different kinds of Commercial
Zones (33.100.130; they are not allowed in Portland’s Multi-Dwelling Residential
Zones (33.100.120).]

Source: City of Portland, Oregon Website:

http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?c=28148
Accessed April 2004.
APPENDIX IV: Contact information for organizations and individuals involved in
urban agriculture in Detroit
Adamah
Jim Embry, Executive Director
The Boggs Center
3061 Field St.
Detroit, MI 48214
Phone: 313-923-0797 Email: info@adamah.org

Earthworks Garden
Contact: Brother Rick Samyn
c/o Capuchin Soup Kitchen
1820 Mt. Elliott
Detroit, MI 48207
Phone: 313-579-2100, ext. 211.

Detroit Agricultural Network/Michigan Hunger Action Coalition

Contact: Ashley Atkinson
220 Bagley, Suite 326
Detroit, MI 48226
Phone: 313-963-7788 Email: aatkinso@umich.edu

Foundation for Agricultural Resources in Michigan (FARM)

Contact: John Gruchala
33 E. Parkhurst
Detroit, MI 48203
Email: jsgbase@aol.com

Greening of Detroit, The

Rebecca Salminen Witt, Executive Director
1418 Michigan Avenue
Detroit, MI 48216
Phone: 313-237-8733 Email: info@greeningofdetroit.com

Dr. Kami Pothukuchi. Assistant Professor

Department of Geography and Urban Planning
Wayne State University
225 State Hall
Detroit, MI 48202
Phone: 313-577-4296 Email: k.pothukuchi@wayne.edu

Paul Weertz
c/o Catherine Ferguson Academy
2750 Selden St.
Detroit, MI 48208
Phone: 313-596-4770