The Future of Garden Design?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Phil Voice on November 22, 2009 at 16:13

Interesting question Duncan - I think for anyone to tackle this you might need to expand on the question a bit by explaining what you perceive to be 'current systemic deficiencies' and why you think current landscape design is 'disappointing '?

Permalink Reply by Duncan Heather on November 22, 2009 at 16:54

Light Blue touch paper and stand well clear!

The loss of regional identity, (the fact that developers are building the same houses in John o' Groats as Lands End )

The popularity of mock Tudor boxes with tiny windows, built on ever decreasing sizes building plots.

The fact that 90% of all buildings constructed in the UK have absolutely no architect involvement what so ever!

Is garden design still stuck in the 1970's

Does it matter that a well know garden designer still is regurgitating what his fathers taught 40 years ago.

Is it important that a Chelsea based school is still turning out compartmentalised design with yew hedges and herbaceous border?

Is it the fault of the design schools that garden design is so poor?

Is it the developers who are to blame, or the public for buying it, or maybe it the fault of the RHS and the ubiquitous Chelsea Flower Show

Permalink Reply by James Todman on November 22, 2009 at 18:15

With the limited garden space that most modern houses have I think the trend towards edible garden design will grow.

I notice a trend in people wanting their garden space to provide something tangible other than a pretty herbaceous border or a seating area. Gardens can be designed in a way that they look good yet can also provide food for the table, cutting back on grocery costs and providing the owner with a relatively low cost, enjoyable hobby. The rise in popularity of allotments amongst the 20- 40's is indicative of this.

A second trend, linked to edible garden design, is the development of eco-design. Water-harvesting, compost making and green roofs are all design features that need to be considered in a modern suburban garden.

Although modern gardens have a very small space to work with the home owner is far more aware of how that space can provide for them; as a hobby, as a food source and as an environmental benefit. It's the garden designer's responsibility to incorporate this into their designs, rather than opting for the obvious seating area and herbaceous border.

Permalink Reply by Andrew Tabor on November 22, 2009 at 20:27

In reply to Duncan's list of statements about modern house building and gardens.

You state by regional identity. What is that based on?
Some counties have various stone buildings other have brick, but most have a broad mix of everything.
It's developers that have removed any identity to local modern housing, by producing mass uniformed developments that are totally out of character to the area in which they are built. You know who to blame - the planning authorities.
These developments are forced on the local areas without much choice. The developers have power and large land banks to stop other development which they can use as a lever.

Its always struck me as odd how house building is done in this country.
You say architects are hardly used! I find this totally amazing. No wonder there is a lack of imagination with present house building.
Windows are a big problem with being too small, and usually single glazed wooden when the house is built, only to be replaced a few years later with double glazed plastic ones. This is only one instance, there are many others.

Planer's in this country don't seem to see it a problem to cut up existing gardens either to build more houses. You then have hardly any garden around the existing and new house. People who live in these properties are either not interested in a garden perhaps, or are just lazy about their own environment ie. cannot be bothered to have a lawn or garden with borders trees etc.
I think it's really anti social to allow this type of development in existing housing stock, as people are more inclined to get in their cars - to go shopping etc. Why not allow more flats or appartments, rather than destory gardens and social fabric of an existing area.

I don't think garden design is stuck in the 70s. Theres many modern garden designs out there, perhaps not to everyones taste, some of them.

I think the institutions ie. RHS , National Trust etc. are boring though, and stuck in the past. If you go to one you have seen the lot so it seems. They do have a place, as museums, but I think its over rated and the past is not the present world we live in. After all most things in a garden the ideas were imported from the other side, what is it called? - Europe

Permalink Reply by Duncan Heather on November 23, 2009 at 0:40

While your reply offers up some interesting points James, it bears not relation to my original question of "will garden design improve only when house design improves?"

But in reply, I personally don't share your vision of every garden being a veg patch. It would be the interior design equivalent of only designing in pink! While I agree there is a trend towards growing your own, this is media lead and hopefully will never become the norm. Its not that I'm against veg gardens; I have an organic kitchen garden myself, but from an aesthetic point of view they only look good for 16 weeks a year and I would rather have something visually appealing all year round. If someone only wants a veg then they don't need a design, they need an allotment.

James Todman said:

With the limited garden space that most modern houses have I think the trend towards edible garden design will grow.

I notice a trend in people wanting their garden space to provide something tangible other than a pretty herbaceous border or a seating area. Gardens can be designed in a way that they look good yet can also provide food for the table, cutting back on grocery costs and providing the owner with a relatively low cost, enjoyable hobby. The rise in popularity of allotments amongst the 20- 40's is indicative of this.

A second trend, linked to edible garden design, is the development of eco-design. Water-harvesting, compost making and green roofs are all design features that need to be considered in a modern suburban garden.

Although modern gardens have a very small space to work with the home owner is far more aware of how that space can provide for them; as a hobby, as a food source and as an environmental benefit. It's the garden designer's responsibility to incorporate this into their designs, rather than opting for the obvious seating area and herbaceous border.

Permalink Reply by Duncan Heather on November 23, 2009 at 0:57

Hi Andrew

Historically, every town with a local source of clay, would have had its own brickworks and therefore by default a uniform brick colour throughout its buildings. Villages with a local source of stone would be built of stone and those with locally available slate would have roofs made of slate. Now we have just 5 Brick supplier in the country offering 100's of artificially coloured brick and developers build identical 'show homes' in all parts of the country.

I agree that the planners are as much to blame as the developers who build "box housing" as are the public for buying them. But until architecture moves on, garden design will remain stagnated, because what we do is totally tired to the building.

While I consider myself a modern designer, my hands are tied when it come to the 5 bed detached new build, on a plot the size of a handkerchief Despite a price tag on £500K+ money doesn't buy taste and the majority of client are conservative with a small c.

ANDREW ATHOL TABOR said:

In reply to Duncan's list of statements about modern house building and gardens.

You state by regional identity. What is that based on?
Some counties have various stone buildings other have brick, but most have a broad mix of everything.
It's developers that have removed any identity to local modern housing, by producing mass uniformed developments that are totally out of character to the area in which they are built. You know who to blame - the planning authorities.
These developments are forced on the local areas without much choice. The developers have power and large land banks to stop other development which they can use as a lever.

Its always struck me as odd how house building is done in this country.
You say architects are hardly used! I find this totally amazing. No wonder there is a lack of imagination with present house building.
Windows are a big problem with being too small, and usually single glazed wooden when the house is built, only to be replaced a few years later with double glazed plastic ones. This is only one instance, there are many others.

Planer's in this country don't seem to see it a problem to cut up existing gardens either to build more houses. You then have hardly any garden around the existing and new house. People who live in these properties are either not interested in a garden perhaps, or are just lazy about their own environment ie. cannot be bothered to have a lawn or garden with borders trees etc.
I think it's really anti social to allow this type of development in existing housing stock, as people are more inclined to get in their cars - to go shopping etc. Why not allow more flats or appartments, rather than destory gardens and social fabric of an existing area.

I don't think garden design is stuck in the 70s. Theres many modern garden designs out there, perhaps not to everyones taste, some of them.

I think the institutions ie. RHS , National Trust etc. are boring though, and stuck in the past. If you go to one you have seen the lot so it seems. They do have a place, as museums, but I think its over rated and the past is not the present world we live in. After all most things in a garden the ideas were imported from the other side, what is it called? - Europe

Permalink Reply by a design and build company on November 23, 2009 at 8:08

Hi Duncan

Lets say the 'volume' house builders have been doing their own thing for about 40 years now, squeezing as many near identical 'boxes' onto the smallest plots possible (detached houses with only one metre separating them), sticking a token tree in each garden and designating a useless area of the development as 'open space' to satisfy the landscape percentage planning conditions.

Most buildings now have the same 'footprint' and are are just re-configured internally and use alternating methods of cladding to differentiate between 2 bed, 3 bed, terraced, detached or semi's.

As you say, architects are seldom employed and the standards of construction/finishing are generally appalling.

How do they get away with it? Well by mainly offering the local planning authorities 'back handers' in the form of planning gain and the local contractors operating a 'cartel' with price fixing etc. (or did until recently when this was exposed in the media, they all got massive fines and are now all slowly going out of business.

Obviously, hiring an Architect for a 'self-build'/re-model should result in the best finished article, but I think most architects under-perform and basically churn out what is currently perceived as contemporary design without little effort (and great cost!), basically emulating Grand Design houses. I get to see a lot of different architects drawings and the modern house/extension locally nearly all include sanofil roofs, white rendered walls, cedar cladding, grey aluminium windows and even the same stainless steel uplighters.

Most self-build properties are not designed by architects either, they are designed by planning agents who might be experienced building surveyors or architectural technicians and have no idea about aeshetics and basically draw what they know will get by the councils's planning commitees.

Local Planning Authority Committees are also a strange one, they are made up of councillors who generally have no background in building/architecture but they generally have the final say in what is right for the site and what gets built.

I'll conclude this part of my rant by saying that the general public at large probably do not think hard enough about about what they really want when they move house and get 'sold over' by marketing suites on new developments. They do their new houses up internally with the latest interior design trends, discover the house is too small to store anything, generally run out of money and then call us to sort out the crappy bit of builders rubble to the rear of the house (bounded by fencing that looks like pallets) which is the 'garden'.

part one of rant - more to follow!

Permalink Reply by Duncan Heather on November 23, 2009 at 8:29

David

You and I are singing from the same hymn sheet.

Permalink Reply by Graeme @ BGS on November 23, 2009 at 8:46

Spot on David!

My biggest beef is the number of large apartments that you see in every town. They are all of the same mould and lack any vision or individualism. The grounds (if anything left after being swallowed up by parking spaces) are boring, lack character or imagination.

Permalink Reply by Andrew Tabor on November 23, 2009 at 12:57

Hi Duncan,

I agree with alot of what you have said. Perhaps we need Grand Designs in the Garden World on TV to put a bit off taste and flair into the public imagination as from my experience alot don't have any! Money never follows taste?

Andrew.

Duncan Heather said:

Hi Andrew

Historically, every town with a local source of clay, would have had its own brickworks and therefore by default a uniform brick colour throughout its buildings. Villages with a local source of stone would be built of stone and those with locally available slate would have roofs made of slate. Now we have just 5 Brick supplier in the country offering 100's of artificially coloured brick and developers build identical 'show homes' in all parts of the country.

I agree that the planners are as much to blame as the developers who build "box housing" as are the public for buying them. But until architecture moves on, garden design will remain stagnated, because what we do is totally tired to the building.

While I consider myself a modern designer, my hands are tied when it come to the 5 bed detached new build, on a plot the size of a handkerchief Despite a price tag on £500K+ money doesn't buy taste and the majority of client are conservative with a small c.

ANDREW ATHOL TABOR said:

In reply to Duncan's list of statements about modern house building and gardens.

You state by regional identity. What is that based on?
Some counties have various stone buildings other have brick, but most have a broad mix of everything.
It's developers that have removed any identity to local modern housing, by producing mass uniformed developments that are totally out of character to the area in which they are built. You know who to blame - the planning authorities.
These developments are forced on the local areas without much choice. The developers have power and large land banks to stop other development which they can use as a lever.

Its always struck me as odd how house building is done in this country.
You say architects are hardly used! I find this totally amazing. No wonder there is a lack of imagination with present house building.
Windows are a big problem with being too small, and usually single glazed wooden when the house is built, only to be replaced a few years later with double glazed plastic ones. This is only one instance, there are many others.

Planer's in this country don't seem to see it a problem to cut up existing gardens either to build more houses. You then have hardly any garden around the existing and new house. People who live in these properties are either not interested in a garden perhaps, or are just lazy about their own environment ie. cannot be bothered to have a lawn or garden with borders trees etc.
I think it's really anti social to allow this type of development in existing housing stock, as people are more inclined to get in their cars - to go shopping etc. Why not allow more flats or appartments, rather than destory gardens and social fabric of an existing area.

I don't think garden design is stuck in the 70s. Theres many modern garden designs out there, perhaps not to everyones taste, some of them.

I think the institutions ie. RHS , National Trust etc. are boring though, and stuck in the past. If you go to one you have seen the lot so it seems. They do have a place, as museums, but I think its over rated and the past is not the present world we live in. After all most things in a garden the ideas were imported from the other side, what is it called? - Europe

Permalink Reply by Richard@www.seasons-garden.co.uk on November 23, 2009 at 13:34

Hi Duncan

I think it can be argued that most of the UK population are uneducated toward design in general. Most people were taught Art in secondary school and if they were bad at it dropped it. 'Design' certainly wasn't taught at my school. It wasn't until college where I learnt Interior Design and later Garden Design.
I think an eye for design covers the whole spectrum: Gardens, Architecture, Furniture etc. So many of my customers seem completely oblivious to good or bad Garden Design and the way it effects quality of life in general.
In the UK the building trend has been to maximise every sq inch of space for profit with scant regard for resident's quality of life.
I am fortunate to live in a 'Span' house. Anyone who knows about Span, Eric Lons, Ivor Cunningham & Co will be aware that the Lansdcaping was of equal importance to the buildings; how they were tied in with the surroundings and the creation of beautiful spaces for residents. The bad news was that Span went bust during the building but developers must change their attitude fast.

Permalink Reply by a design and build company on November 23, 2009 at 19:58

Rant (part 2)!

My next question/observation is why does modern house building (and landscaping!) have to be such a messy (lots of wet trades) operation, with poor finishes (+ massive snagging lists), lots of lost time due to the weather and the general 'don't give a s**t attitude' of sub-contractors not respecting the work of others and ruining it.

I believe houses should all nowadays be built either as site erected panels (i.e. Huff Houses) or modular pre-fabricated modules (i.e. portakabin or those plastic shower pods that fit in IBIS Hotels). Everything built in factorys to a high standard, delivered and erected effeciently on site (german stylee). I don't think landscaping should escape this treatment either. Lets face it paving and decks are fiddly, time consuming things to bespoke construct on site. Most average properties built these days have roughly the same width of elevation. Deck frames could easily be constructed in a modular unit system out of galvanised steel and assembled on site in any number of configurations. The 'infill' panels could be anything you desired (as long as it structurally strong, has grip and takes the elements) i.e. steel 'checker plate', epoxy resined gravels on steel and plastics etc. All of these could be pre-wired for lights/speakers and water-features etc.

I think UK construction is generally stuck in its ways and needs to fully embrace northern european construction techniques and learn from related industrys such as engineering.

End of part 2 of 'rant'!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page