Green wall and roof garden
projects pose many challenges
to good planting design outcomes,
particularly synergizing design
intent and management. How can
the processes be improved?FINE-TUNING
THE PLANTING
DESIGN CYCLE
TEXT JELA IVANKOVIC-WATERSAGENDA
F
ulfilling the potential of planting design
can be a challenge for landscape architects
and this is nowhere more confronting than
in green infrastructure projects, such as
green roofs and roof gardens, green facades and
living walls. In these instances, the variables are
seemingly too complex and difficult to pinpoint.
The issue reveals the disconnectedness between the
design and the management of planting. The aim of
this article is to capture some of the missed oppor-
tunities in green infrastructure project processes
that could contribute to more successful planting
design outcomes.
In the current wave of densification in Australia’s
major cities, demand for marquee “green buildings” is
driven by developers and architects. The idea of
“living architecture” is intensified by the expectation
that the planting design will be supported for the
duration of the building’s lifespan, up to fifty years.
Technological innovation in architecture, engineering
and horticulture has rapidly improved the way green
facades and vertical and roof gardens are integrated
into buildings. Moreover, the increased use of data
has spawned specialist consultants who design, install
and manage green infrastructure systems.
So, what is to stop the client from altogether
bypassing the landscape architect in these projects?
The following points make a case for the benefits of
engaging landscape architects for green wall and roof
garden projects.
Firstly, design responses by landscape architects
ideally embed multiple functions and values.
Although aesthetics is often foremost on the client’s
agenda, the design should also address functions
including thermal or acoustic insulation, water →
1LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AUSTRALIA MAY 2017 23