As a landscape designer, I increasingly see new building developments surrounded by the bare minimum of landscape schemes, usually designed by the architect as a last minute offering to ease the project through the planning stages.
It doesn’t always have to be an afterthought. If considered in detail, landscaping can be the ultimate compliment to the building in which it surrounds. It doesn’t only have to be about soft landscape either, many schemes are let down due to the poor quality of paving materials, step details and street furniture, as they are usually specified from an out of date brochure that’s lying around the office library. If a landscape architect is involved with a development from the early stages, these details can be designed and specified to tie the whole development together and provide a scheme with equal proportions of aesthetics and functionality.
The typical response to this is that the landscape does not generate extra revenue for the developer. In a round a bout way, I agree, but I will say that it does go a long way in making the building more attractive to investors and tenants and it could be the decider between two alternative options. It also creates an environment which will attract further investment in the future as more businesses wish to locate around an active commercial centre.
If the landscape is left to be a mere afterthought which fails to integrate with the development, we are sadly left with an outside space which is underused and unmaintained which unfortunately accounts for about 95% of our spaces designed within the last 50 years.
Do we really want to leave a legacy like the one our forebears of the late 50’s and 60’s left for us?
George Barnes
Landscape Designer
Vector Design Concepts
Comments
at its best it should be able to produce building and landscapes that work together perfectly