Landscape planning for small homes

Chapter I What Is Landscape Architecture?

When a group of persons see parks being graded and planted, or a neighbor's yard being laid out, one will say that it is "landscape gardening," another calls it "landscape a:chitecture," and still another remarks that it is "fine gardening." Is it possible that any one of these terms means the same to all three persons, or to others? A florist may think of landscape gardening in terms of "bedding-out" plants and of round or square beds cut out of the lawn. A gardener or horticulturist may have visions of hardy-perennial flower borders. An architect perhaps looks for terraces, balustrades, and formal gardens, and if these be wanting he feels but little concerned. Others may expect ample lawns scattered over with fine trees and shrubs.

If the man who is laying out the park is asked what he calls him?elf, he may say he is a gardener, or a florist, or a contractor; or it may be that he styles himself a landscape gardener or a garden architect. However, this will depend upon circumstances. He may be a very succes-sful man in a small territory, as in a suburb of a large city, or even in several adjoining cities. Perhaps he has adopted the title of the man from whom he learned the rudiments of his profession, or from the custom of the school at which he prepared himself. But whatever the circumstances with respect to any individual among the multitude claiming to be of this profession, one finds little uniformity in the kind of work they do, in the scope of their activities, in the name by which they designate their profession, in their point of view, and in their training and preparation. Is it to be wondered, then, that the public looks on with some skepticism and with a tendency to underrate the profession?

To return to the scene of the neighboring yard which is being laid out — to the crowd that gathers on the sidewalk to watch the work going on inside the fence. To most of these this landscape gardener or landscape architect is merely the man who "plants bushes." Some have noticed that he also makes roads and walks, but to the crowd this seems unlikely. Others say that he has trees and shrubs for sale. But some one ventures the remark that his bushes are procured from a nursery, and the same individual is also quite certain that this man, whose function is so much in question, only makes plans and looks after the work. Another onlooker remembers that a large place nearby had been laid out a few years ago, and that there a great number of workmen had been employed all summer. There had been a boss who hired the local contractors to do the grading, the roadbuilding, and to lay the drains. Near the house had been constructed a formal garden with walls, steps, flowers, and a pool of water. Carpenters had built a fine fence all about the place, and, finally, quantities of trees and shrubs had been planted everywhere about the grounds. Some remembered that periodically a well-dressed man from a distant city had made visits, and had been seen talking with the boss and with the owner of the place. But what was the use of all this expense, when one could get ideas from the magazines and hire a local man to do the work?

There is always a curious crowd, and of course its speculations are not always a true indication of public opinion. However, a far more intelligent point of view on the part of the public is much to be desired regarding landscape architecture — what it is, and what it may do for every home owner. The public is more than curious. It is genuinely interested! Most home owners, regardless of station or income, desire to make their surroundings more attractive, and most of them actually attempt it, although perhaps not with very great success. However, of those who desire attractive yards, how many realize that at the same time their yards may be made more useful and more convenient?

This general interest has grown to such proportions that the nurserymen have for some time been pressed, by those buying plants, to give advice for their arrangement and planting. In many cases there is no one else at hand to furnish such advice. Some nurseries have tried to sidestep this question, others have refused to give any suggestions, and others, seeing therein an opportunity to increase their sales, have established landscape departments, with or without charge, according to what has seemed most feasible. Some landscape architects complain that the nurseries should not undertake landscape work. But most professional landscape architects do not want, and many will not even accept, what is termed "small business," as they say it does not pay. So here is a demand for a much-needed service, with no competition, and with little interest shown by those best able to supply the need.

To the nurseryman and the florist, the requests of their patrons for advice in planning and planting appears as an obstacle to their sales. The gardener accordingly takes down his florist sign and puts up one which reads "landscape gardener." He has observed the work on large places in his vicinity, and keeps an open eye for ideas. As small jobs are abundafit, he finds plenty of practice, and with this comesconfidence. Similarly, the nurseryman receives calls from nearby residents who say they would like some shrubs., if men can be sent from the nursery to plant them. As he is a business man, he meets the demand — he adapts himself and his organization to public demands. To do this adequately, he must find someone capable of taking the responsibility of giving advice and of directing planting operations. Of course he must make this new man pay, possibly by increasing the charges for his stock, by charging an extra fee for his services, or by materially augmenting his nursery sales. The new man must in some way earn his salary. Moreover, he himself wishes to make good, and so goes after business, and also after larger work on larger residences. Eventually he reaches out for the big estates which the landscape architect has hitherto considered his legitimate and exclusive field of activity.

It cannot be expected that the man whose main interest, training, and experience is that of growing and selling plants will also understand the theory of their design, and the arrangement of plants is but a part of the whole operation of planning, or, to speak more technically, of "designing." Designing includes not only the arrangement of plants, but of all objects and areas within a property. The man of ideals, the artist trained in design and especially in landscape design , should best know how to deal with the practical as well as with the artistic possibilities of any piece of land, park, or residence, as these fall within the scope of design The work of the landscape architect requires a special genius, training, and experience, just as does that of the nurseryman or of any other business or profession. But if the artist will not accept little jobs, where can persons of moderate means obtain the best advice?

In general business there is to be seen a parallel to this situation. There are many kinds of stores, some making sales of large values, and others of smaller values but in greater volume. Business men have found a way of making satisfactory profits not only from large sales but also from a great volume of small sales. Perhaps it is not reasonable to draw a parallel between general business and the practice of an artist's profession. It is to be hoped, however, that in a measure this comparison is possible, and that it will succeed in interesting designers in the small-residence problems and in their possibilities. Indeed, those who may undertake to deal with the thousands of small -residence jobs will very likely discover that a business of great volume awaits them.

But why, in the past, have landscape architects failed to handle small jobs with profit? It would be a difficult and tedious task to make a searching inquiry into the small- job experiences of those men who are today the representative landscape architects ; nor could a single person speak for them all. Until comparatively recent times, no one wanted their services except a few persons owning expensive homes and whose opportunities in life had shown them, at home and abroad, the possibilities of beautiful artificial gardens or of parklike scenery. Travel, especially in Europe, has always been limited to those of means, and not all of those who see and know about fine gardens become sufficiently interested in them to want them. Persons who wanted fine gardens and could afford them, until quite recently, were few and far between. To reach these individuals, the landscape architect was subject to heavy expense in travel and to considerable loss of time. In preparation for his profession, a long period of study and varied experience at home and abroad had been necessary. Furthermore, as a business venture the profession was a precarious one, promising at best no immediate success, and requiring a number of years for the establishment of business on a paying basis. In the past, only a man of means and of great interest in his chosen profession could afford to become a landscape architect; and it is evident that he would necessarily have to charge a considerable amount for his time, whatever his services.

In recent years, the employment of either a landscape architect or a local gardener to do the grading and planting about new buildings has become the common practice. The work is not all good, but the plants are pretty! The thousands of families that are constantly filling up new subdivisions in all the cities see other "pretty" front yards or larger estates, and desire to follow suit. Here is the new demand for landscape advice — from the small -home owners. Is this demand for really good advice, or is the call merely for the untrained opinion of the local gardener or of the nursery-plantsman? Among the owners of small homes, as well as among the wealthy, there are many persons having comparatively little feeHng for art. They have not had time to develop such an appreciation. Most persons like good landscape work when they see it, but they may not so understand and appreciate it as to be able to distinguish the good from the poor. No appreciable difference may be noticed by the layman between the work of the skilled designer and that of the man trained only as a gardener, especially if the examples of both types of work are not sufficiently near each other to make the contrast indisputably evident to even the uninitiated. The idea that the gardener can give more attention to the practical details of planting appeals. Also, the charges of the local gardener are more consistent with the reasonable expenditures for work about the small home.

Persons of somewhat broader experience and who perhaps have seen good landscape work, say they "want the best advice," and they engage some recognized landscape architect. Not unlike Americans of all classes, they spend a little more on their house and its furnishings than they had originally planned, and as the whole business approaches completion it becomes necessary to lessen expenses in every possible way. They want all the attractive features proposed by the landscape architect; but as the work progresses, due either to under-estimating on the part of the landscape architect or to their own over-estimating of their resources, curtailment of the work becomes necessary. In the eyes of the architect, his work, thus terminated, is unsuccessful.

In other instances of small residences done by landscape architects, the cost of maintaining them, after all is finished, has proved to be too great a financial burden. If landscape work is neglected for want of means or for want of skilled gardeners, especially while such work is new and immature, it is natural for the landscape architect to be disappointed; and surely such examples of his work do him no credit. It is safe to say, furthermore, that most landscape architects have found that it is more difficult to procure good gardeners for small places than for large ones.

In other cases in which the landscape architect has been engaged for such small jobs, there have arisen difficulties over professional charges, which, to the smallhome owner, seem unreasonably large, especially when, toward the end of things, circumstances become somewhat colored by his worry over his bills. Yet the landscape architect may not have charged so much for these small plans as lor larger ones , although his visits took just as much time as did those for his larger jobs, and although most likely he had akeady made considerate reductions from hi? customary charges. In the past he had met with clients of ample means who did not appreciate his work, and with others who required a great deal of redrawing of their plans. Even some of his larger and most successful jobs had deteriorated for want of good gardening. But in the case of these large jobs he had at least been well paid for his services. Thus it has come about that, all things considered, the landscape architect is likely to regard the little job as only "much ado about nothing."

There are examples of small homes well done, but they are few and far between. Unfortunately, not homes of the same size and cost, but rather the larger and more elaborate residences are selected as models for the smaller ones. And if these larger "landscaped" homes are flashy with yellow-, blue-, and purple-foliage plants and resplendent with evergreens, it is these which are more likely to be used as models for some poor little front yard, resulting in a very much overdressed effect. Small homes are new problems to most landscape architects; likewise, the landscape architect is still somewhat of a stranger to the suburbanite and the commuter.

After all, how many persons understand the advantages of good landscape planning? It is much to be feared that, to the average home builder, "landscaping" is but a part of the beautifying of his home; hence to him it is still but a luxury. But nothing is too good for him, and the only questions are "how much will it cost?" and, "how far can I aflford to go with it?" This attitude, as well as the misunderstanding which causes it, is probably general. Does the average person have any idea that these developments, this landscape planning, may have any practical bearing upon the usefulness, the convenience, or the value of his completed home? It should be understood that grounds of limited extent may be planned to be useful as well as pleasing in appearance. Also, is it not quite possible that some plans are better than others? The achievement of both usefulness and beauty through careful planning is not supposed, by the average understanding, to lie within the scope of landscape work.

The work of the landscape gardener or of the florist has been concerned with appearances, the covering up of ugly things, the pretty arrangement of plants, the making of smooth lawns, and the like. It is not generally understood that good planning looks primarily to the economical use of space, and to the reasonable arrangement of parts and objects which are related. A well-planned house may have individual rooms of the same size as those of a poorly planned one; and furthermore, the first house may contain less total floor space or less cubage than the other and thus cost less because it is more compact. The well-pJanned one would also be more convenient and better in appearance. And all this results from careful planning. The same principle applied to small yards will be equally effective, and the need becomes greater as the yards become smaller. But more of this later. That planning is both useful and beautifying which the landscape architect aims to accomplish.

It might be well, at thib time, to explain from whence came the name "landscape gardener." Landscape architecture has a history, and thereof this explanation is a part.

The term "landscape gardener" was first used about 1785 by one Sir Humphrey Repton, an Englishman, who determined to become an advisor to those wishing to layout or to improve their country estates. According to his explanation, the word "landscape" was used to distinguish his profession from that of a gardener, and also it referred to the kind of scenery to be made, namely, the reproduction of the pictures of landscape painters, for the painting of rural scenes was just then coming into vogue and arousing great popular interest. The fad which resulted was that of having picturesque and rural scenery about houses, instead of the formal gardens of old. Several gardeners had leaped into fame for their supposed ability to make imitation rivers and picturesque, rural si^enery, where before there had been such stately settings for great buildings as imposing courtyards, terraces, and fine gardens. Repton wanted to do better in the making of such scenery. He stated his intention to be that of reproducing the pictures of landscape painters in real scenery, or, at least, of applying their ideals to the composition of scenery about the great houses of the English country estates. Furthermore, in coining the title "landscape gardener," he wished to do two things — namely, to distinguish himself from, and to set himself above, the gardener, and to express some connection with artists, whereby he would commit himself, in his work, to the studv of their landscape pictures and the principles that governed their compositions. This was his explanation of the term as he used it, and under this title he practiced his profession.

Repton was a man of good education and of some means. His father was a merchant, and this vocation the son likewise was expected to foUow. He lived on the small rural estate left him by his father, and perhaps it was while living there that he developed his interest in rural scenery. However, mercantile business failing, to quote from a biographical note:

The possibility of turning to advantage that natural taste for improving the beauties of scenery, which had formed one of the dearest pleasures of his rural life, suggested itself to his mind one night when anxiety had driven <;leep from his pillow. The scheme which at first seems to have entered his mind with almost the vague uncertainty of a dream, assumed a more substantial form, when, with the return of day, he meditated upon its practicability. With his usual quickness of decision . . he spent the whole of that day in writing to his various acquaintances. . . .explaining his intention of becoming a "landscape gardener," and he lost not a moment in bending his whole mind to the acquisition of such technical knowledge as he thought necessary for the practical purposes of such a, profession.

Previous to the time of Repton, in fact for nearly a quarter of a century before his birth, there had existed in England an almost universal predilection for naturalistic scenery in the place of formal gardens; and in many cases, gardens hundreds of years old, surrounding equally old houses, had been destroved to make way for this picturesque scenery. Today it is recognized that this was a mistake and a misfortune, in spite of the fact that some of the estates thus "improved" did not even date back to the time of King Charles II (1668), and were not nearly so good as those of the Tudor times (1500- 1600). Advocates of this "new Style," however, were not discriminating: all that was condemmed as "formal" was swept away to be replaced by the picturesque — a style of equal artificiality had they but stopped to realize it.

Repton took the stand that, adjoining the houses, some conventionality was desirable, and that not all should be "landscaped." For that day and time, this was a wholly commendable stand for a man in his position to assume; but apparently he did not Hve up to it. Yet remembering that he was trained to be a merchant rather than a designer, it is not surprising that he was somewhat influenced by the taste, or want of taste, of his day. He was in fact, an able man, whereas the other advocates of the natural style, who had preceded him, were mostly mere adventurers and opportunists taking advantage of a passing fad. And for a certainty, Repton took his title most seriously. The following is a quotation from his answer to a letter in which he was criticized for assuming so ambitious a title:

But, while you are pleased to allow me some of the qualities necessary to my profession, you suppose me deficient in others, and therefore strongly recommend the study of "what the higher artists have done, both in theii pictures and drawings" a branch of knowledge which I have always considered to be not less essential to my profession than hydraulics or surveying, and without which I should never have presumed to arrogate to myself the title of "landscape gardener," which, you observe, is "a title of no mean pretention."

While Repton was not so wholly absorbed in the ideals of the picturesque as were most of his predecessors and contemporaries, most of his work, nevertheless, dealt almost exclusively with the pictiu-esque landscape of English private parks, or, as we would call them, pasttires. This type of artificial scenery may be seen today in our large city parks, in our golf Hnks, and in the meadows of oux large country estates; and it is appropriately called "parklike." It is also known as "landscape" scenery, deriving this name from the same origin as does the term "landscape gardening."

Landscape gardening continued to prevail as the designation both of this particular style and of the profession, until Mr. Frederick Law Olmsted (who died in

Boston in 1890) assumed the title "landscape architect." It should be understood that, both in its inception and in its application, the term "landscape gardening" referred primarily to planting and grading operations, and also that it implied the use of but one style for all situations — -namely, the parklike. Thus it would seem that persons still adhering to this title should, to be consistent, practice Mr. Repton's theories — theories very good in some ways but very limited and, in some respects, unquestionably wrong. Today the work of the landscape architect includes the planning of parks, of subdivisions, of park systems, and, occasionally, even of entire cities. Furthermore, the plannmg of residences may involve architectural settings appropriate for city homes, as well as those suitable for both simple and architecturally elaborate country estates. In such a variety of work, in order to suit all situations it is necessary to deal in both formal gardens and parklike scenery. Further, in planning and in executing designs for park systems, parks, gardens, and the like, one finds himself confronted by problems of engineering, economics, agriculture, building construction, and, last and most important, design.

Hence it would seem that the expression "landscape gardening," as a general name for the profession or its work, is entitled to no status today, and, in fact, most persons so styling themselves are but gardeners and florists. With these distinctions made clear, perhaps a definite statement of the aims and scope of the profession will now be more readily undsrstood.

Landscape architecture aims, first, to produce an economic arrangement of the objects and parts of a property, or unit of land; and, second, to attain beauty in the kind of scenery that is suitable to any particular property. These aims are developed, not in sequence, but simultaneously in the design. For the amateur it may be best to think of planning in this way — as a dual function.

Then it is the aim of the landscape architect to plan both for convenience and for attractiveness s of setting. For a certainty, a convenient and compact arrangement is also the most easily decorated. In fact it is surprising how well a group of buildings look which have been given an orderly disposition ; or how well a new residence appears when the house is suitably placed, the walks and roads are laid to a good line, and the ground is well-graded; and this is noticeable even before any planting has been done or any mature or settled condition has been attained. The orderly arrangement, though bare of decoration, is attractive in tself.

But some persons will attempt the improvement of a residence without any previous thought for the plan as a whole. They imagine that merely by planting trees and shrubs, or by laying out flower beds, or by making a garden, this is possible. In such cases the result proves not very successful, and usually more planting is resorted to, with the mistaken idea that success in the result depends only on the amount of material planted and on its cost. A disorderly plan is bad enough ; but an excess of planting further clutters a yard and adds to the appearance of confusion. The importance of starting with a good plan would be appreciated by such persons if they could but see how well even a half -finished example of landscape work looks, even while there is evident only the skeleton of its ultimate arrangement. The effect is pleasing at this stage of its progress because it is apparently orderly and compact, and because each part is coordinated with other related parts. It looks useful and yet has style also. An awkward plan may at times be improved by decoration, if its defects are thereby somewhat hidden ; but this solution does not make it more convenient, and the result is seldom interesting in appearance. Careful planning is not only necessary for convenience, but its contribution is essential to the achievement of the beauty desired.

In a collection of articles on the early history of landscape architecture, written some twenty-five years, ago appeared the following definition; and though these articles dealt largely with the extensive parks and gardens surrounding royal palaces, the fundamental principles expressed therein are sound:

The art of gardening means the art of arranging surfaces of land and water, with all the forms of vegetation they support and all such works of architecture or sculpture as may be thought desirable , according to some settled design or scheme. Its productions may vary in character between the most formal and the most natural looking effects; and in size between the smallest bit of verdurous ground in a city street and the widest rural park. But they may always be distinguished by the fact that organized beauty has been sought in their creation. Horticulture aims at the development of beautiful individual plants. Economic gardening, like the sister craft of agriculture, so disposes of the surface of the ground and the individual plants that cultivation can most easily be pursued; but when we speak of the ait of gardening, we imply a result in which, though individual plants are valued and usefulness is largely served, a beautiful general effect has been the main concern. — Mrs. Schuyler Van Renssalaer.

While the point of view of twenty-five years ago is somewhat different from that of today, nevertheless this interesting definition presents the subject very clearly, and is wanting only in those very practical aspects which confront landscape architecture today in our very practical age.

The following quotation from the diary of Charles Eliot, written about the same time as Mrs. Van Renssalaer's article, defines landscape architecture as, "the art of arranging land and landscape for human use, convenience, and enjoyment." In a letter written in 1890 he says further: "The scope and breadth of my profession is not often recognized. As I understand it, all conscious arranging of visible things for man's convenience, and for man's delight, is architecture." Then he quotes from Morris: "A gre?t subject, truly, for it embraces the consideration of the whole of the external surroundings of the life of man: we cannot escape from it if we would, for it means the moulding and the altering to human need the very face of the earth itself." Further on in his letter, Mr. Eliot continues:

This building of convenient and beautiful structures is thus but a part of architecture. The arranging of these structures in streets, in neighborhoods, on seacoasts, in the valleys of the hills, the careful adjustment of the structure to its site and its landscape, the devising of ways and roads so that they may either be impressive through order and formality, charming through their subordination to natural conditions, the development of appropriate beauty in the surroundings of buildings, whether by adding terraces and avenues or by enhancing natural beauty — all this is, or ought to be at least, one-half of the art and profession of architecture. This is the landscape architect's part; for tha field is so wide that it can hardly be comprehended by one man, and two professions are necessary, each approaching and helping the other.

In another letter, written in 1 896, to one whose article on the function of the landscape artist had confused landscape architecture with landscape gardening, Mr. Eliot wrote:

Landscape architecture includes and covers landscape engineering, landscape gardening, and landscape forestry. A formal avenue or parkway is a work of landscape architecture; so is a well-designed picturesque park. The engineer and the gardener will each have his share in both pieces

of work; but each must labor for the perfecting of the general design if a successful result is

to be achieved.

There remains considerable evidence of good planning in the gardens of the ancients, although in many cases their works seemingly were intended only to embellish the surroundings of buildings. If we may judge from what little we know of them, the works of the Romans showed more eviden e of planning than was apparent in the work of the earlier peoples; and this planning seemingly comprehended entire properties with all the structures and areas included therein. On the whole, aesthetic considerations seem to have prevailed. Landscape planning in Europe during the Renaissance varied considerably in the different countries, but the most typical examples invariably show practical considerations subordinated to artistic effects. Modern landscape architecture has recognized the value of efficiency in planning. It seeks economy in the use of space and topography, and convenience in the arrangement of related parts, as well as endeavoring always to obtain the most pleasing general effect.