Petting Farm / 70F Architecture


Architects: 70F Architecture
Location: Almere,
Commissioner: Municipality of Almere
Budget: 150.000 EURO
Constructed Area: 126 sqm
Project start: 2005
Project finished: 2008
Photographs: Luuk Kramer

08418-012 08418-049 08418-054 09147-015

Most city parts of Almere, a city with almost 190.000 inhabitants, have a petting farm. In the ‘den Uyl’ park there used to be one, but it burned down in the early 80′s, leaving only its concrete foundation. Early 2005 we were commissioned by the municipality of Almere to design a new petting farm on the exact location and the remaining foundation. The building was finally built using almost only sponsored money, and finished late 2008.


We designed a wooden box with an open facade system for the upper half of the building, allowing the wind to ventilate the whole farm continuously. Half of the building is stable; the other half consists of toilets, storage and on the second floor an office and storage. The stable itself has no second floor. As you walk lengthways through the building, you will pass the animals that are contained to the left and to the right behind fences. There are no doors in the building, but there are six shutters, two for the public on the short ends of the building and four for the animals, two on either long side of the building.


These shutters will open manually or automatically in the morning, reacting on the upcoming sun, as they will close again at the end of the day, when the sun goes down. The animals will easily learn to be inside again on time, if they like. At night, the building becomes a light beacon in the park.

One could say that the box, a building extensively reduced in aesthetic violence, wakes up and goes to sleep every day.

Cite: "Petting Farm / 70F Architecture" 26 Jul 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed 15 Sep 2014. <>


  1. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Very nice and a step above humane conditions for animals. I also love how the construction presents possibilities to be converted to house different functions and would still be able to maintain its original elegant context. It seems to have a bright purposeful future. Outstanding!

    that is all.

  2. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Very nice, however looks very familiar. Refer to Sean Godsell Carter Tucker House a timber box that opens. The Sheep might have appreciated the location a little bit more.

    • Thumb up Thumb down 0

      I was wondering if u have any details about Carter/Tucker house. About the materiality and the connections between the materials

  3. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    I have a curiosity about budget… with this price/sqm, here in Brazil you can built almost 3sqm of a luxury house… and considering that this project is for sheep, and they already have the foundations, it raises a question: is really that expensive to build in europe and the netherlands, or just good architecture costs that much?

  4. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    They will spoil the sheeps:) ” I will not give my wool unless you build me a sheep jacuzzi!!!!!”:))))))

    • Thumb up Thumb down 0

      solomon Etana Posted on I am from Ethiopia and I am a graduate of Engineering Geology stdeunt(MSc program) and I still look forward to continue my education in similar and related subjects.Would you please forward me important links and the application procedures?thanks in advance

  5. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Great building. The animals and people visiting should be very happy about it. How much in US dollars did it cost – from the plan, to material and building? Will I be allowed to use exact plan in South Africa?

  6. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Very nice project!
    Just one remark: “At night, the building becomes a light beacon in the park.” I know it’s very cool in contemporary architecture to have light beacons, but don’t these sheeps have to sleep? I’m sure they don’t prefer light al night long…

  7. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Why would you want to use this in South Africa, Mojalefa? Our government would never pay that much for a petting zoo. This building is very elegant, but redundant.

Share your thoughts