Alicia Vaalburg

Jonathan Wetstein
CTRP 2251/5251
10 November 2023

Philadelphia’s Zoning Code recently underwent its most comprehensive revision in almost fifty
years, as the previous update dates back to 1963. Although there were changes to zoning rules
for Center City in 1991, adjustments have been made gradually over time through individual
ordinances and overlays. As a result, the document became quite complex, struggling to keep up
with the city's evolving needs. Title 14: Zoning and Planning Code seeks to recognize the
significance of zoning regulations in development and acknowledges their role in shaping
Philadelphia's physical and social aspects. It hopes to serve as a framework that guides land use
and development within the city, including its impact on the local food system (14 101).

The main objective of this study is to examine how the Philadelphia Zoning Code influences the
food system. Given its complexity and historical background, this research aims to uncover how
these regulations affect where food-related activities are located. By analyzing provisions within
the code, we hope to gain insight into how zoning decisions consider environmental factors and
how they impact aspects such as accessibility, sustainability, and overall health of our local food
system.

The aspect this code aims to reform relevant to the food system is its sustainability goals. The
Zoning Code promotes development around mass transit hubs by reducing vehicle miles
traveled, supporting renewable energy and energy saving, conserving water, permitting urban
agriculture, encouraging walking and community health, and improving the city’s efficiency (14-
101). The Zoning Code focuses on preserving natural areas and significant historical sites. It
reflects the city’s commitment to environmental concerns and is a part of the broader objective
of ensuring sustainability in city development.

Title 14 of Philadelphia's Zoning and Planning regulations has a comprehensive set of guidelines
for food-related activities, overseeing various elements of the food industry. Within the
Wholesale Sales and Distribution (485.1) subcategory, there are provisions for businesses that
engage in wholesale sales, bulk storage, and distribution of goods. Additionally, this category
allows for incidental retail sales, recognizing the significance of regulating the large-scale
distribution and sale of goods. The Commercial Services Use Category further distinguishes food
preparation businesses focusing on off-site sales or service in the Commissaries and Catering
Services subcategory. This clearly distinguishes food-related businesses and large-scale
manufacturing or processing operations. The Retail Sales Use Category (464.1) encompasses
businesses selling, leasing, or renting goods to the ultimate consumer. The specific subcategory
focused on Food, Beverages, and Groceries (468) includes various businesses providing food and
beverages for off-premise consumption, with a notable type being Farmer's Markets (.1). This
recognition of Farmer's Markets allows for the direct sale of crops to consumers in designated
spaces, whether enclosed or outdoors. These regulations outline guidelines for food-related
activities, ensuring a balance and recognition between a large-scale distribution and direct sale of
locally grown produce to consumers in designated spaces.
The Urban Agricultural Use Category (11) outlines specific regulations addressing urban
farming and community gardening within Title 14. This category covers a range of activities,
including Animal Husbandry, Community Gardens, Market or Community-Supported Farms,
and Horticulture Nurseries and Greenhouses. The regulations state where these activities are
permitted and restricted, emphasizing the city's commitment to supporting diverse forms of
urban agriculture. Community Gardens are managed by a group of individuals who grow and
harvest fresh produce for individual, community, charitable, or business use. They may be
permitted in residential, mixed residential/commercial, industrial, institutional, entertainment,
stadiums, and airports. However, their activity is restricted in port industrial districts and areas in
the city in recreational parks or open spaces. Market or Community-Supported Farms, managed
by individuals or groups for selling or distributing crops, are allowed in diverse residential and
industrial areas. However, they restrict specific zones like Center City Commercial Districts,
high-density industrial districts, industrial ports, areas designated for stadiums or entertainment,
and districts reserved for recreational parks or open spaces. Special exception permits are
necessary for residential districts zoned for single-family detached homes and institutional
districts. Urban agriculture regulations include horticulture nurseries and greenhouses,
propagating and growing plants for wholesale and retail distribution.

Residents can find their garden's zoning category to navigate these regulations on the city's
website. It's important to know that zoning is enforced by the Department of Licenses and
Inspections (L&I) and governs what can be built and how the land can be used. The zoning code
for Philadelphia acknowledges Urban Agriculture as a potential land use category, simplifying
the process of dealing with zoning restrictions. Residents interested in starting a community
garden or market farm need to be aware of additional requirements. These include preventing
water and fertilizer runoff, ensuring rodent-resistant refuse and compost bins, adhering to storage
area regulations, limiting certain activities during specific hours, and selling food only on the lot
where it was grown or at an approved food retail site. Applying for a zoning and use registration
permit is necessary for property owners, those officially leasing from the city, or a private owner.
However, a use registration permit is not required if the property is designated for single-family
homes or religious institutions. Non-property owners should seek community cooperation to
address potential issues and maintain positive neighbor relations. (Grounded in Philly, 2019)

Laura Lawson’s exploration of community gardens follows their evolution from the 1960s.
Community gardening projects started mainly as beautification programs organized by women’s
associations and garden clubs in the 60’s. The primary growth occurred in the 1970s due to
volunteers reacting to the high inflation, civil disorder, and abandoned properties. Environmental
ethics and open space needs were born during this period, making community gardens local
activism. However, community gardens had problems with land security. Organizers had to
create coalitions, participate in city planning, and look for ways to own sites. A key observation
is that community gardens are essential interim activities but are not necessarily treated as
permanent public resources like parks. While community gardens faced challenges, including
land security and a mismatch between planning frameworks and personal gardening, they
persisted with their own community development programs. Lawson's insights raise questions
about the relationship between planning and community gardens, suggesting a misunderstanding
between structured urban planning and the desire to fill vacant lots with gardens

“Community Gardens.” Pennsylvania Community Gardens | PHS Programs, 2023, phsonline.org/programs/community-gardens/find-your-community-

garden.

Kate A. Voigt's observations in "PIGS IN THE BACKYARD OR THE BARNYARD: The

“REMOVING ZONING IMPEDIMENTS TO URBAN AGRICULTURE” article provides a
more detailed analysis of urban agriculture’s challenges resulting from zoning impediments. This
paper explores the intricacies of why zoning codes can impede urban farming development,
giving a detailed analysis of some instances when these regulations contradict sustainable and
community-based farming objectives. It also shows where zoning restriction stops the urban
agriculture initiatives through specific examples, making them look more practical. Her work
may include observations on how some zoning codes may limit urban agriculture's scale, scope,
or activity types, which could be as simple as keeping farm animals or cultivating crops. In
addition, Voigt’s observations could also be associated with the broader implications of these
zoning obstacles in terms of community participation, urban agriculture, and sustainable
development. By examining urban farmers' struggles traversing zoning regulations, her work
assists our comprehension of the complex intersection between regulatory frameworks and urban
agriculture.
GIS Policy Map

The accessibility of fresh produce in Philadelphia is influenced by the distribution and location
of full-service grocery stores and farmers' markets. In urban planning and community
development, "food deserts" often describe areas where residents have limited access to
affordable and nutritious food, including fresh produce. Philadelphia experiences disparities in
fresh produce accessibility across different neighborhoods. While some areas benefit from well-
established grocery stores and farmers markets, others face challenges related to transportation,
affordability, and fresh, nutritious food availability. In Philadelphia's urban development, the
conversation about fresh produce accessibility emphasizes the need for equitable access to
healthy food, considering disparities in different neighborhoods. The 1960 Comprehensive Plan
was a transformative era in Philadelphia's professional urban planning. As we move to the next
topic, this plan will provide insights into how the city aimed to grow and address various
challenges.

The 1960 Comprehensive Plan for Philadelphia represented a visionary urban development
initiative to reform the city's commercial landscape. The plan committed to establishing 169
local shopping centers strategically positioned to ensure every resident was within a 5-minute
proximity. They aimed to serve as community centers and were designed to boast one or more
supermarkets, serving trade areas with populations ranging from 5,000 to 40,000 individuals.
The plan recognized the diverse needs of different areas, prescribing varying parking ratios based
on the density of the built environment. In densely populated regions, a 1:1 ratio of parking space
to floor space was recommended, while in lower-density areas, different standards were applied
(PG 53-54). The 1960 Comprehensive Plan was rooted in the philosophy of enhancing
accessibility and convenience for residents, emphasizing the role of local shopping centers in
meeting the population's daily needs. The ambitious goal of ensuring that every citizen could
easily access essential goods and services within a short distance served as a commitment to
creating an equitable and interconnected urban environment. However, as developments
unfolded, challenges emerged in realizing this vision. The plan's impact on zoning decisions and
the evolution of shopping centers revealed a complex relationship between the original
aspirations and the practicalities of urban development.

The impact of the 1960 Comprehensive Plan was also felt in subsequent zoning decisions,
especially in response to the declining shopping centers in Philadelphia. Planners attempted to
shift the declining centers to match the emerging needs within the urban framework. This initial
vision's long-range impact on the city's commercial makeup is evident today. These adaptive
strategies reflect shopping centers' challenges in recent times, including the challenges of the
food supply chain and the intertwined relationship between food retail spaces and food
accessibility. They trigger the assessment of large shopping malls, mainly having unused parking
lots separated from the local environment.

In the critique of large shopping centers, “sea of asphalt” refers to the departure from a
pedestrian-oriented plan expected in the 60s. The intervention has focused on these vast parking
lots with no sidewalks or amenities. Street vending, which aims to provide cheap lunch options,
has highlighted the significance of placemaking infrastructure. However, such issues as lack of
seating, visual buffers, and pedestrian experience make the need for a more detailed approach to
these spaces' design. The idea of sub-regional, neighborhood, and community shopping centers,
as proposed in the 1960s plan, saw these centers play a significant role in residential
neighborhoods. In contrast, the local hubs were designed to be within easy reach of the
surrounding community, not the regional centers, which are dependent on highway access.
Nevertheless, the present situation of these centers showcases barriers like vacant stores, barriers
to adjacent community resources, and wide surrounding streets limiting pedestrian access. The
necessity of re-designing the public rights-of-way to facilitate walkability and link to community
services is apparent, thus pointing to a possible mismatch between the initial vision and the
current urban fabric (Repositioning Declining… , 2020, PGS 32, 34, 35).

The article "Why Community-Owned Grocery Stores Are the Best Recipe for Revitalizing Food
Deserts" examines the role of community-owned grocery stores as a superior solution for
addressing food deserts—areas characterized by limited access to affordable and nutritious food.
It uses the Detroit People's Food Co-op as a prime example of a community-driven project
aiming to rectify the shortcomings of commercially owned and placed grocery stores. The text
challenges the conventional narrative, blaming food insecurity solely on the absence of grocery
stores in low-income neighborhoods. It questions the efficacy of large retailers, such as Walmart
and Walgreens, in genuinely meeting the needs of underserved areas, particularly when faced
with issues like gentrification and community resistance. Commercially owned supermarkets that
struggle due to lack of community engagement, the passage showcases successful community-
driven examples like the Mandela Co-op. These cooperatives actively work to address inequities
in the food system, pay living wages, and involve residents in decision-making. The passage
concludes by asserting that the community ownership model, as demonstrated by cooperatives,
should be a focal point for policymakers and public health officials seeking to tackle the
deficiencies of commercially owned and placed grocery stores in mitigating food deserts.

The 1960 Comprehensive Plan envisaged an ambitious urban development plan, focusing on
creating easy-to-access shopping centers. Though the plan had continued influence in the
subsequent decisions, the contemporary shopping centers challenge demonstrates that urban
development is dynamic and requires a flexible response. The tension between the original vision
and modern realities highlights the approach in shaping the city’s commercial landscape.

In their text “The Hidden History of Food System Planning,” Domenic Vitiello and Catherine
Brinkley examine mid-20th-century planning and its effect on the food system. In particular, it
examines how conventional planning organizations largely overlooked the food system during
this time. However, the authors point out that although the focus of research and practices during
the early 20th century was on food planning, planners started to distance themselves from
agricultural concerns in the mid-century. Away with food production landscapes from the visions
and urban experiences of planners. Apart from that, the industrialization of the food system
contributed to the dispersion of production and distribution landscapes, prompting planners to
leave food planning.

This concluding research project looked into the effect of the recently revised Philadephia’s
Zoning Code on the local food system. The study examined how the intricate zoning regulations
impact the spatial distribution of the crucial elements of the urban food supply chain, comprising
urban agriculture, food markets, and various components of the city’s food ecosystem. The
research sought to unpack how various Zoning Code considerations influence the local food
system's availability, sustainability, and overall health outcomes.

The significance of the Urban Agricultural Use Category (11) was revealed in the research,
providing detailed regulatory requirements that represent the city’s engagement in different
formats of urban agriculture. It highlights the areas where these activities, like community
gardens and market farms, are allowed, indicating that the most serious challenge is the question
of land security. Insights from Laura Lawson focused on community gardens as key intermediate
activities, highlighting the need to include gardens within the framework of planned urban order
and filling empty lands with gardens.

The study further tackled the practical issues of maneuvering zoning rules that govern people
looking forward to launching community gardens or urban farms. It also considered the findings
of Kate A. Voigt and the challenges of zoning barriers to urban agriculture, thus enriching a
sophisticated picture of the dynamics between the regulatory framework and sustainable
development.

The research took notice of the inequalities in fresh produce accessibility in Philadelphia and the
concept of “food deserts”, stressing equitable access to healthy food. This historical view of the
1960 Comprehensive Plan uncovered its forward-thinking initiatives of facilitating accessibility
and convenience through properly situated local shopping centers. However, the study critically
analyzed the plan's impact on zoning decisions and the contemporary challenges shopping
centers face, reflecting the dynamic nature of urban development.

Finally, examining community-owned grocery stores as a solution for addressing food deserts
underscored the importance of community engagement and ownership in creating sustainable
and equitable food systems. The research project successfully accomplished its goal of analyzing
and evaluating the multifaceted impact of Philadelphia's Zoning Code on the local food system,
shedding light on how zoning regulations shape the city's food landscape's environmental, social,
and economic dimensions.

List of Sources

Philadelphia Zoning Code:

“Title 14. Zoning and Planning.” American Legal Publishing, 2021,
codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/philadelphia/latest/philadelphia_pa/0-0-0-286773.

“Philadelphia Zoning Laws for Urban Farming & Community Gardening.” Grounded In
Philly, 14 Apr. 2019, groundedinphilly.org/growing-food/.

“Zoning for Urban Agriculture.” Healthy Food Policy Project, 11 Oct. 2021,
healthyfoodpolicyproject.org/key-issues/zoning-for-urban-agriculture.
City Planning Reports and Documents:
“The 1960 Comprehensive Plan: Philadelphia City Planning Commission.” City of
Philadelphia, Philadelphia City Planning Commission , 4 May 1960,
www.phila.gov/documents/the-1960-comprehensive-plan/.

“Repositioning Declining Shopping Centers Executive Summary.” City of Philadelphia

(.Gov), Philadelphia City Planning Commission, Oct. 2020,
www.phila.gov/media/20201021074033/PCPC.ShoppingCenters_Executive-Summary-
Final.pdf.

Academic Journals on Urban Planning and Agriculture:

Prové, Charlotte. “The Role of Urban Agriculture in Philadelphia: A Sociological Analysis
from a City Perspective Summary Report.” The Public Interest Law Center, Public
Interest Law Center, 2015, pubintlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Report-Urban-
Agriculture-Philadelphia-Charlotte-Prove.pdf.

Citations from Text:

Vitiello, Domenic, and Catherine Brinkley. “The hidden history of food system
planning.” Journal of Planning History, vol. 13, no. 2, 2013, pp. 91–112,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538513213507541.

Voigt, Kate A. “PIGS IN THE BACKYARD OR THE BARNYARD: REMOVING

ZONING IMPEDIMENTS TO URBAN AGRICULTURE.” Environmental Affairs, vol.
38, 2011. 537.

Lawson, Laura. “The planner in the garden: A historical view into the relationship between
planning and Community Gardens.” Journal of Planning History, vol. 3, no. 2, 2004, pp.
151–176, https://doi.org/10.1177/1538513204264752.

Op-ed, Catherine Brinkley |. “Why Community-Owned Grocery Stores Are the Best
Recipe for Revitalizing Food Deserts.” Next City, 13 Sept. 2019, nextcity.org/urbanist-
news/community-owned-grocery-stores-revitalizing-food-deserts.

Interactive:

“Community Gardens.” Pennsylvania Community Gardens | PHS Programs, 2023,

phsonline.org/programs/community-gardens/find-your-community-garden.