07.06.2014 Views

Landscape – Great Idea! X-LArch III - Department für Raum ...

Landscape – Great Idea! X-LArch III - Department für Raum ...

Landscape – Great Idea! X-LArch III - Department für Raum ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

68<br />

argument was put forward for omitting hedge planting<br />

from sites 2, 7 and 14 . However, the suburban contexts<br />

of these sites did not represent particularly strong identities<br />

vulnerable to disruption by green roofs, and certainly<br />

not the relatively low-key addition of new hedges. In<br />

such circumstances, the omission of such elements on<br />

the grounds of perpetuating a distinct identity would<br />

seem misguided. In any case, should respecting local<br />

identity and vernacular be about preservation alone?<br />

A vernacular is simply a physical manifestation of the<br />

technical, political and artistic climate of the day, and<br />

what better a vernacular for the 21st century than one<br />

encouraging biodiversity and, more generally, sustainability?<br />

Hough (1984) in his book City Form and Natural<br />

Processes, Towards a New Urban Vernacular, pointed<br />

out that we need to move towards new landscape forms<br />

that are in tune with the growing concern for the issues<br />

of energy, environment and natural resource conservation.<br />

In the intervening years this need has not diminished.<br />

Even in areas of cherished identity, it could be<br />

argued that it is the perpetuation of quality and thought in<br />

design that is important, rather than specifics of form and<br />

materials; particularly if the climate which gave rise to the<br />

vernacular is no longer relevant.<br />

Conclusions<br />

This research highlights that a housing development‘s<br />

supposed alignment with sustainability, does not guarantee<br />

that biodiversity has been considered in its<br />

landscape. The ‚green idea‘ of a bio-diverse landscape<br />

stands in stark contrast to the ‚grey reality‘ of the majority<br />

of the landscapes observed here. Translation of<br />

any great idea into reality requires commitment, and the<br />

early and sustained input of ecological advice on housing<br />

projects, and a commitment from all stakeholders to<br />

act accordingly, is vital. Sensitivity is also required to<br />

integrate biodiversity with community needs. The public<br />

can be wary of environments that do not meet their idea<br />

of a ‘standard’ condition; failure to recognise this was a<br />

key failure of sixties modernist, social housing (Aldous<br />

1997) and this should not be repeated. The relationship<br />

between landscape preference and ecological quality<br />

is unclear (Williams and Cary, 2002) so developers and<br />

consultants should work on a site-by-site basis with local<br />

communities to identify the approporiate position on the<br />

continuum between gardenesque and wildness. The<br />

resulting landscape also needs to be cognizant of ecological<br />

and physical context. There is sufficient flexibility<br />

in bio-diverse landscape design to allow this: bio-diverse<br />

landscapes need not appear untamed and imposed, and<br />

housing developers need not be hide-bound by suburban<br />

mores if a more ecological landscape is amenable to<br />

the community and the local planning authority. Where<br />

such opportunities occur the planning authority must<br />

commit to enforcing biodiverse landscape designs, which<br />

might otherwise become eroded away as the project<br />

proceeds. The UK Government and its agencies can<br />

also play a part by looking beyond houses themselves<br />

when appointing exemplar schemes for planning authorities<br />

and developers to follow; highlighting the versatility,<br />

viability and vivacity of bio-diverse residential landscapes.<br />

Although community participation can be helpful<br />

in facilitating acceptance of bio-diverse plantings on<br />

aesthetic grounds, this research also suggests that the<br />

removal of maintenance from the residents‘ shoulders is<br />

also important <strong>–</strong> particulalry in social housing. The multispecies,<br />

multi-layered nature of sustainable planting not<br />

only encourages biodiversity, it also lowers maintenance<br />

(Dunnett & Clayden 2007) but it is not maintenance free.<br />

Ironically The Housing Corporation, who fund the vast<br />

majority of English public housing (Priaulx 2004), calls<br />

for high standards in residential green spaces (Housing<br />

Corporation 2003) but offers no maintenance funds to<br />

social developers. By pushing the onus of landscape<br />

maintenance onto tenants, the Corporation is restricting<br />

what can be implemented and should, instead, consider<br />

offering additional maintenance support to developers<br />

who, through commitment and sensitivity, demonstrate<br />

alliance with the green idea of bio-diverse landscape.<br />

References<br />

Aldous, T. (1979). Introduction. Chapter 1. In: Trees and buildings;<br />

complement or conflict? T. Aldous (Ed). London: RIBA Publications.<br />

Aldous, T. (1997). Urban Villages. A concept for creating mixeduse<br />

urban developments on a sustainable scale. Revised edition.<br />

London: Urban Villages Forum.<br />

Baines, C. (1998). The green perspective. Proceedings of NHBC<br />

Annual Conference: Sustainable housing <strong>–</strong> meeting the challenges.<br />

Amersham: National House Building Council. pp 31 <strong>–</strong> 35<br />

Barton, H. & Kleiner, D. (2000). Innovative Eco-Neighbourhood<br />

Projects. Chapter 5. In: Sustainable Communities, The Potential<br />

for Eco-Neighbourhoods. Barton, H. (Ed.). London: Eathscan.<br />

Biddulph, M, Franklin, B. & Tait, M. (2003). From concept to<br />

completion. A critical analysis of the urban village. Town Planning<br />

Review. 74. 2. pp 165 <strong>–</strong> 193.<br />

Burgess, R.G. (1984). In the Field. An Introduction to Field Research.<br />

London: Routledge.<br />

CABE (2005). What home buyers want: Attitudes and decision<br />

making among consumers. London: Commission for Architecture<br />

and the Built Environment.<br />

<strong>Department</strong> of the Environment, Transport & the Regions. (2000).<br />

Regeneration Research Summary: Millennium Villages and Sustainable<br />

Communities Final Report. (Number 30). London: DETR.<br />

Dunnett, N. (1995). Patterns in nature: inspiration for an ecological<br />

landscape design philosophy. In: <strong>Landscape</strong> Ecology; Theory and<br />

Application. Proceedings of the Fourth International Association for<br />

<strong>Landscape</strong> Ecology (UK) Conference. pp 78 <strong>–</strong> 85.<br />

Dunnett, N. & Clayden, A. (2007). Resources: The Raw Materials<br />

of <strong>Landscape</strong>. Chapter 10. In: <strong>Landscape</strong> and Sustainability. Second<br />

Edition. J.F. Benson & M.H. Roe (Eds). London: Spon Press.<br />

Dunnett, N. & Hitchmough, J. (2004). More than nature. <strong>Landscape</strong><br />

Design. April 2004. pp 28 <strong>–</strong> 30.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!