Small Footprint, Big Yield: Create an Easy Micro Organic Urban Garden Today!
April 28, 2009
There are two things urban gardeners are short on: space and time. The Urban Garden, brainchild of Bill Arquitt, resolves both of these issues, making it efficient and simple to plant a vegetable garden with up to 55 plants in a 3-foot deep by 4-foot wide footprint.
The contained six level tiered system is nearly maintenance-free, eliminating heavy weeding, and its northwestern cedar construction renders it naturally bug repellent.
Category: Container Gardening, Containers and Pots, Creating, Edible Landscaping, No-Dig Gardening, Raised Beds, Urban Agriculture
Enjoyed this post? Subscribe to Urban Gardens!
share | permalink | 
e-mail a friend | comments (30)
Very interesting variation of raised bed gardens! I haven’t seen anything like it.
Your photos are beautiful. You have a great website here.
— July 23, 2009 @ 5:59 pm
Small Footprint, Big Yield: Create an Easy Micro Organic Urban Garden Today! | Urban Gardens | Unlimited Thinking For Limited Spaces | GardenHacker.com Pingback said:
[...] Small Footprint, Big Yield: Create an Easy Micro Organic Urban Garden Today! | Urban Gardens | Unlim…. [...]
— July 31, 2009 @ 11:21 pm
Typical shity dweller idea. Please boycott the use of NW Cedar. It is a second growth only tree. We have scant few left. It is not a farm-able tree.
— July 31, 2009 @ 11:34 pm
what an creative idea. Perhaps a different type of wood might be better. Thanks for the idea!
— July 31, 2009 @ 11:45 pm
I don’t get it. It might be my ignorance and the page doesn’t explain, but how does raising it in a stepped fashion increase overall space? 3×4 space is 12 sq ft of plantable space. Raising it does not increase the overall footage. Is there some correlation with root depth and the boxes stacked have no bottom so plant roots go down? Setting the steps on the original bed makes that space unplantable. I don’t get it except it is esthetically pleasing.
— July 31, 2009 @ 11:54 pm
I don’t get it either. How does it give you more space? How do you utilise the lower box when most of its area is covered by the other boxes?
— July 31, 2009 @ 11:59 pm
DUMB, DUMB, DUMB. More soil, more wood, slightly less growing space than a plain old one level box.
— August 1, 2009 @ 12:34 am
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Margaret
http://howtomakecompost.info
— August 1, 2009 @ 7:51 am
Same as other comments. I looked at the picture and wondered why they tripled the amount of dirt needed. Poor design unless you were actually using deep root plants in back. Doesn’t appear to be the case. Looks nice enough, but doesn’t solve any problems.
— August 1, 2009 @ 10:12 am
This set up, properly situated, would solve a gardening problem I have. It could maximize use of limited sunlight (available from only one direction), which is often a problem in an urban area where properties are close together.
A similar setup could be obtained with containers on risers. It would be easier to use recycled materials to construct risers.
— August 1, 2009 @ 12:59 pm
The pyramid shaped box would be useful as an herb garden. More sun for the plants facing sun side, more shade for the plants away. Better drainage up top. So it provides several different mircroclimates in the same area.
As far as the stepped one goes. I agree with above posters. It’s purely for show. Not really any practical purpose to it.
— August 1, 2009 @ 1:30 pm
All the boxes unstacked and the same amount of soil would give you 3.5 times the growing area! The same growing area in a single layer would require 1/3 less wood. Otherwise, looks cute. Shame to waste all that Northwest Cedar – the boards will rot in a few seasons, but it takes a tree a hundred years to grow to a harvestable size.
— August 1, 2009 @ 1:47 pm
Are we stupid?Or too lazy to think?This is the same as a raised box garden.And it’s Patent Pending!!Come on.!
Space saver?
Now this is a real space saver imho
Grow 100 pounds of potatoes in 4 square feet
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/homegarden/2002347126_potatoes25.html
— August 1, 2009 @ 10:21 pm
Wasted space…an no deep room for root systems. Plus, it appears you have hollyhocks planted in the lowest “box.” As they grow, not only do they require significant water, but they will also block sunlight from the plants behind. One other note on using the NW cedar. Someone above mentioned it was “2nd-growth.” Not true. A lot of cedar is cut from old-growth forests, which are in horrible threat of being reduced and gone from our region forever. Don’t use cedar! Use your head and just plant on the damn ground using soil, compost, and steadfast determination.
— August 3, 2009 @ 4:39 pm
Boggy Woggy: how do you suggest an urban dweller “just plant on the damn ground”? if you live on the 15th floor of an apartment building, and have a 10×10 balcony as your personal outdoor space, there isn’t a lot of “damn ground” to work from, you know? These terraced boxes present a way to plant a garden in a very tiny amount of space. a simple raised bed brings “the damn ground” onto a balcony, true…but leaves precious little room for anything else…stacking the growing spaces on top of each other this way allows same square footage into a smaller physical footprint. Think, people. This website IS called “urbangardensweb” you know? How to grow your own veggies in a city is the theme.
— August 9, 2009 @ 9:13 am
Thank you Adelle! Granted, I do believe using a different wood would be better as I do try to be environmental. I also live in an apartment. I am on the lower floor but planting in the ground is completely off limits for me. I have a small patio that this design would be perfect for. Thank you Urban Gardens!! I love the idea but will use a different wood.
— August 9, 2009 @ 1:23 pm
The deeper boxes would be great for celery which requires 3-4 feet deep of rich loam soil to grow well. Root vegetables like carrots would also love the deeper levels. Larger plants like zucchini, tomatoes etc would likely need pruning to one or two vines but one needs to sacrifice if attempting to fit many plants in such a small space.
— August 9, 2009 @ 2:57 pm
Very nice idea. I was thinking it would be good for someone who had trouble doing a lot of bending down. Also, it has a clean and attractive design for a small space — and weeds from my little yard couldn’t get in!
— August 9, 2009 @ 9:51 pm
Why not use the recycled plastic wood? No rot, keeps some plastic out of landfills, saves trees…
Also, you could simple shop garage sales for planter boxes and put them on cinder blocks or other elevating materials to save one’s back.
Overall, I liked the idea of the “stepped” garden to take advantage of solid walls or one-way sunlight.
Very nice site!
— August 10, 2009 @ 12:49 pm
Great Idea, Would be easy to plant and weed.
— August 10, 2009 @ 4:02 pm
nice idea but if you angle the face boards(top out bottom in) you will increase the surface growing area and reduce the footprint of each level, while the roots can grow into the deep soil at the back. works well for strawberries.
— August 11, 2009 @ 11:47 am
GastroNomalies » Blog Archive » The Perfect Gift for a City Gardner Pingback said:
[...] Up to 55 plants in a 3′ x 4′ space! [...]
— August 20, 2009 @ 1:59 pm
Your idea looks very neat and efficient. Keep up the good work.
— September 18, 2009 @ 2:42 pm
that is seriously something so inventive and creative, good stuff
— September 25, 2009 @ 4:05 pm
this design makes no sense at all.
does NOT increase planting area but uses tons more dirt and way too much wood.
why …??? … the “benefits” given are simply wrong.
— December 22, 2009 @ 9:47 am
Who is going to carry the hundred pounds of dirt up to the 15th floor? and where is the excess water going to go? Down to the 14th floor? what happens when the wood rots and dirt goes everywhere? Is there going to be a big stain on the balcony and will I have to pay to have it removed?
— January 31, 2010 @ 10:50 pm
I don’t get it, either, but am curious about what’s in the parts of the boxes we can’t see? Are they full of soil all the way back or is that just dead air? It raises things up nicely but doesn’t create or save any space. ???
— March 16, 2010 @ 2:33 pm
Good Things in Small Boxes: Urban Garden, Tiny Footprint : The Green Children Foundation Pingback said:
[...] of the Urban Garden products consist of compact raised beds. The layered designs help urban gardeners squeeze a large amount of usable ground out of a remarkably small footprint. The boxes even feature [...]
— March 26, 2010 @ 11:13 am
I think such a design would work well on my 1m x 1m balcony! (Not 5 tiers but maybe just 2!) I was told container depth was important for tomatoes, and most deep pots also tend to be wide. I have 3 large pots lining my balcony wall and there isn’t space for a second row of pots on the floor! The featured design is a lot slimmer, yet probably a good depth for my tomatoes, and I would be able to fit other sorts of veg/flowers on the lower level.
— May 1, 2010 @ 6:54 pm
all these doom and gloom people bitchin, but no real ideas to improve or replace this idea, hmmmmmmm so much for the unlimited ideas right?
— July 10, 2010 @ 1:54 pm