Design considerations extend not only to beds and borders, but to open space, entertaining space, hardscape, access, etc., and ideally, none of these functions is designed in a vacuum -- the best results often are achieved when all of the homeowner's needs are considered to create a complete plan that works well.

Who will be using it? Does it need to accomodate children, pets, disabled persons? Do poisonous plants need to be excluded? Are deer or other varmints a problem?

What activities will take place in the area? Relaxation? Active games? Flower gardening? Bird watching? Veggie gardening? Entertaining? Are fruit trees desired?

Are there privacy issues? Pleasing views off-site that need to be framed and enhanced? Unattractive views on or off-site that need to be screened or disguised? Do you need to incorporate a utility or storage area in the design? Playspace for kiddies? Fence for safety of kids and pets?

What features does the homeowner want? Pond or other water feature? Flower gardens? A setting for a piece of sculpture? Support for roses?

Do the homeowners entertain much? If so, how many people do they usually need to accomodate outdoors? Is there going to be a grill or barbecue? It should be sited near the outdoor dining area, as well as be convenient to the kitchen. Nothing like hiking across the yard with trays of food.

Who will maintain the garden? Is the homeowner a gardener, or will a mow and blow service do most of the routine maintenance. How much time is the homeowner willing or able to devote to maintenance. Deadheading, mulching, leaf removal, keeping walks and patios clean, edging the lawn all take time and energy (or money).

Are there any drainage issues that should be addressed? Regrading to accomodate the desired use? Does topsoil need to brought in? Are there Homeowner Association rules in effect that prohibit certain changes? Town ordinances that will affect the design? Building codes?

Then you get to things like style of the house and general atmosphere of the neighborhood, homeowner preferences for particular plants, what colors they like, plants they dislike. And they may have ideas of their own that make the execution of a design tricky, especially if they have very strong views and no design savvy.

I'm sure I've missed something.

Saypoint,

Please write for a local newspaper and/or magazine on gardening issues. I would so love to see a weekly column from you. Each time I read one of your posts, so cleverly, clearly and concisely written, I learn something. (I don't suppose you went to a Seven Sister college, did you?)

Patty

Thanks for the compliment, Patty. I do enjoy writing, always have. All of this information is contained in many books about design, but somehow it's hard to digest. I've been reading about gardening and design for many years, and could regurgitate bits of info that I'd read, but somehow I could never put it together until I started studying design at the local community college. Maybe it's the discipline required in the classroom and the act of practicing using design principles for projects that will be graded that makes it sink in.

I've spent literally 10-15 hours on plant selection for a small front yard design, and made 10-12 pages of handwritten lists and notes on possible plants to use before narrowing it down to the ones that will best fit the intention of the design. If I had to make a living at this speed, I'd be making something under minimum wage, but it gets easier and quicker each time, unless the site conditions change! I highly recommend taking a couple of classes in design for anyone who is a serious hobby gardener if you're lucky enough to have one offered nearby.

LOL, no I didn't attend one of the Seven Sisters, but I've been a reader all my life. I used to read under the covers with a flashlight when I was a kid, and when they took that away, I set my hair on fire trying to read with a candle when I was supposed to be asleep.
Jo

All of Saypoints "questions a designer should be asking" are very good. One thing that should be undertood is that there are many ways for a designer to get the answers to these questions, so you may not hear them asked. Walking the site and listening to you explain what you think you want will tell a lot about you, your family, your guests, the things you want to do, the things you have to do, and what floats your boat aesthetically. Small talk on seemingly unrelated subjects often yields a lot.

Don't be surprised if you are not bombarded with direct questions. You'll know whether you are being engaged or ignored. Someone who is in tune with you is going to be making you feel confident and comfortable with or without a questionaire. Probably much more without it because you know they are reading you and processing the information rather than going through a check list.

After all, anyone can copy a question list.

laag is right, there are many ways designers glean the info. My clients are frequently amazed as we walk around the site discussing uses and needs, and I'm not writing anything down. I find it much more effective to listen and look them in the eye as they describe their needs, rather than writing as they speak, make a better connection this way. And this doesn't require a photographic memory.

I can see where this would allow a designer to create a functional design - but how does it create a beautiful design? I think it was Mies van der Rohe who said "form follows function," but how does it follow that the form is then gorgeous?

I worked with a very good landscape designer (I very much like her other projects in the area) a few years ago who asked questions similar those posted by saypoint but the final design (even allowing several years to pass for it to grow to some type of maturity) is not at all beautiful to me although it works well within the parameters we discussed. I blame myself somehow for not giving better "direction" but I still can't pinpoint where I went wrong.

Even if a designer is capable of creating a landscape that functions well, there is no guarantee that it will be an inspired design. Or even an attractive one. That comes down to the designer's eye for detail, experience, aesthetic sense, and desire to make the effort to come up with a design that is more than just passable. It also requires good communication between designer and homeowner in order to be on the same page. A portfolio of built work is the best way to see what a designer is capable of, and whether they will be able to understand your vision for your own landscape.

Accordian, I'm wondering what you felt was lacking in the landscape you had designed. Any photos?

Saypoint, I don't have a photo because it is now an area in transition to...something different. It was not an entire landscape, just a portion of a greater whole. What was it lacking? I'm still not sure. I have seen a lot of this particular designer's work and like it very much, she is talented, experienced and professional and I thought her aesthetic would translate well to this project. I have a tough landscape to work with, an imposing modern house (school of design: brutalism) in a woodland environment. The previous owners put in a lot of really beautiful bluestone hardscape: paths, terraces, water feature, stairways and a long bluestone gravel driveway. These features are very difficult to integrate into the basically untamed wilderness. And they do need to be integrated, they are difficult to maintain in a bramble and their beauty can literally be hidden under an overwhelming swamp of Japanese barberry and garlic mustard. I'll have to post questions about this on a separate thread because I think I've hijacked this one, but basically there was a disconnect somewhere in the aesthetics between the modern and rather monolithic building and hardscape, the rustic woodland environment and the attempt to integrate the two. It just looked false and wrong.

If you give the client what they want without interrogating them then they may think you are a "divvy" (mindreader), which makes you look special. So, there is a business reason for not going through a questionnaire each time.

One of my teachers told us to get inside the house and quietly note what colors had been used, and so forth.

Hmm, I wrote this before and it didn't get posted, wonder what happened? Anyway...

Saypoint brings up a good point with,"the best results often are achieved when all of the homeowner's needs are considered to create a complete plan that works well."

I'm sure great results come when plans are designed in totality with all of the various functions and parts of the landscape taken into consideration before the work is done. Even if the work is done piece by piece, it would be a puzzle effect that would eventually yield the cohesiveness of the original plan.

I appreciate Saypoint's list of questions because it can give the average homeowner a place to start when they are unable to afford to pay a designer. I believe the average homeowner working bit by bit throughout their landscape - which is what I was thinking about when I mentioned designing a bed/border/garden - often has a difficult time bringing cohesivness to their landscape. I wonder if there is a way - like quilting - to combine many seemingly different pieces into a cohesive whole?

Can a homeowner without the luxury of a designer bring something like that together? Maybe this is another topic but maybe there are some questions that would help that person focus their efforts?

Hmmm. Not quite that easy. The cohesiveness you mention is called Unity, and is one of the Principles of Design. There are a number of other principles that affect whether or not unity is achieved, and each one has to be learned.

According to Wm. Nelson, Unity is achieved by applying the principles of Simplicity, Variety, Balance, Emphasis, Sequence, and Scale. The use and proper application of each of these has be understood. And this is before you consider Color, Form, and Texture when selecting plants and other materials.

Another post from a homeowner asking for help got me thinking about how people view what a landscape designer does. I didn't want to make the poster feel like I was blasting him or her, and didn't want to hijack the thread, so I'll add some thoughts here.

I likened the design process to what an artist does. Certainly, just as with the fine arts, some people will have a talent for good design with no formal training at all. A thorough knowledge of plants is required, whether through long experience or intensive study and a willingness to do the research when selecting plants for a design.

There is also the knowledge of how the form, texture, color, and placement of plants and other materials affect the overall design. This comes down to technique, just as the artist must be adept with brush, or pottery wheel, or whatever tools are used to bring a vision to life. Once the techniques are learned, they must be practiced and refined.

I'm just a student of design, there are professionals on the forum who may have other thoughts on this topic. The more I learn, the more I see how much more there is to know.

A question I read in a book asked "what do you like about the site already". I found it very helpful to specifically focus on what I already had that I liked...some large boulders, a few very beautiful trees, wild growing ground cover, a shady nook, and so forth. Even with a bare landscape, one might like the light orientation or a view.

I would think that a landscape designer would need to elicit this from a client.

Patty

Not all designers are the same and neither are clients, it is probably when the two 'click' that the magic appears. When Louis Sullivan said "form must ever follow function" he was talking to architects at a time when the ornamentation of buildings seemed to him to detract from their function. So a good design is both functional and gorgeous not one or the other.
A questionaire is best used as a memory aid rather than a tick the box thing on a clipboard, because you might come with all you need to know to draw up a heart less non descript landscape. A designer needs the cooperation of his client and vice-versa. I have been told by potential clients "Hey, you're the designer so design me a garden" I have also designed gardens that are loved by their owner from a three word description. Of course I had to build up the rapport and ask the right questions to get these three words. You can also stop a potential client in his tracks with "What is the garden for?"
So my long winded response to the question is that you (designer or homeowner) should get away from the question and answer situation as soon as you can. You need to get the business side of the arrangement sorted out, you should know in advance what you want to get out of your meeting and what it will cost. "Can you come and have a look at my property and give me some idea of how I can improve it?" is a preliminary telephone question that leads to a conversation that can save a lot of time and expense.

Saypoint: so essentially what you are saying is that a good design will be planned by a good designer or someone that has an inherant knack for that kind of thing (like an untrained artist)but rarely stumbled upon by the average person. I guess that is the reason that most landscapes are mediocre and the ones that are great cause people to stop in their tracks or even go out of their way to look at them.

Just like a painting. There is an art to LD as well as the technical aspects. If one or the other is missing, whether through lack of training or lack of intuition or both, you're not going to end up with a thing of beauty. Of course, not every landscape has to be a masterpiece, either, to continue the analogy, just well thought out and well executed.

Many amateur gardeners have created beautiful gardens through trial and error, a good eye, a desire to learn, and persistence. You can apply the same idea to interior design. How many people do you know that have really nice interiors without professional help? Most of the interiors I've seen range from uninspired to downright tacky unless the resident takes a keen interest and has a good eye. Why should the landscape be any different?

Nature/Nurture

Some things are easily learned (nurture). Some things are more easily learned by some rather than others (nature). In either case there is still the learning. The depth of that learning required is dependent on the amount of complexity you want to use in the project. No one needs to get very complex, but people seem to want to gravitate to the unusual. That gravitation sets the stage for needing more knowledge when the project might not need all of it.

You more or less define what you need to learn or what experience and skills you need to bring along when you outline your project. The tendency is to define the project and chase it rather than understanding yourself and framing the project around existing capabilities.

The same holds true when hiring a designer. The asssumption is often that a designer designs, therefore they will embrace my project and have the skills to see it through because, after all, that is what they are supposed to do. Rather than looking for a designer that fits the project, or making a project that fits a known designer, the tendency is to make the designer fit the project.

The experienced designer will either manipulate you to alter the project to fit with what they do (not a bad thing at all, if you understand and accept it), or scramble around trying to get it done for you (often with not the best results, but not always), or will pass up on the opportunity (and be thought of as a snob?).

laag, I'm not sure I understand when you say "the tendency is to define the project" (by which I assume you are saying is the wrong way to go about it) "rather than framing the project around existing capabilities" (assumption: the right way). But aren't the questions saypoint and others mentioned ones that "define the project?" And by "framing the project around existing capabilities" I guess you are saying no matter what the answers to those questions are, that a homeowner is limited in their landscaping capabilities by the skill set and comfort level of local experts. Which does make sense actually. In my case it's not like teams of expert landscaping professionals are roaming through the untamed forest looking for work. And the ones who are here could ask questions all day long and not come up with a design that works if they...just can't. And I bet I'm not the only one in this particular boat.

The very first question you should ask yourself is...."Am I willing to listen to and give a designer a chance to think through the situation?" I say this because there are many (and I note some post here) who want to micro manage every detail of the design. I have even had a customer turn down a plant selections because her mother would not approve! Or...another scenario is the husband who arrives home, listens to six sentences about the plan and vetos everything, beginning his own form of micro management.

As Cady says, some designers will "pass up on the opportunity." It takes time to design, to problem solve, to be creative often within budget limits. It's okay to ask questions. But, listening is important, too.

laag: I think I get your point. Many people have grandios ideas but cannot follow through with their projects because they don't have the necessary capabilities (from nurture or nature) and can't hire a designer or hire the wrong one. Is that it? In any case, you seem to have defined an essential question that probably few people -definately including me- think about when designing their landscapes (or having them designed): who am I and how does that translate to what type of landscape I am cabable of producing (or having produced) and, most importantly, that I would enjoy? After all, it seems to be true that even if the design is perfect in all of it's technical aspects, if it doesn't speak to the owner, they aren't going to be happy with it.

For those like me that love the process and probably wouldn't hire a designer if they could, forcing the design to fit what they think are accepted perameters (whatever they are) at the expense of personal enjoyment would end up in failure to love the process and the final result. My attempt at designing a shrub border failed miserably because I was trying to do what I thought I should instead of what I really felt like I wanted. Thankfully, it failed only on paper and I can take the wonderful thoughts of the people here and try again.

What laag says is a theme underlying some of the unhappy posts.
The LD forum is not capable of producing a complete and appropriate LD design for a homeowner but has almost limitless ability to recognize and critique bad design. Yet a homeowner has developed an idea that a desirable landscape is one that will "pass" some external test of adequate design, such as approval by a forum or comparison to a photo. In many cases,that same elusive landscape could also be defined as, a landscape that is beyond the homeowner's capabilities to produce himself ( perhaps well beyond). Yet, a few fundamental features of a "better" landscape may be within immediate reach. The ideal landscape MIGHT be achievable by the DIY but not until years of study, experimentation.

The more a budding amateur LD-interested person can recognize and reconcile this gap, the better. However, many misunderstandings occur along the way.

Therefore ink's comment about, how can I improve my property, seems so appropriate, and sometimes a better way to frame the responses to "help me" posts. But again, the presence of the gap interferes.

I think I've made the analogy before, that it is akin to correcting a problem in children's behavior--sometimes you go for straight for the ideal behavior but often you go for the next STEP UP toward the desired behavior.

It is hard for me to do this in my own landscape, let alone in advice to others, but it seems appropriate in many cases. So along with the checklist ( zone, exposure, functions), I might ask, are you expecting an ideal landscape, or hoping to move one or 2 steps closer than you are now?

Then, I, perhaps along with others, worry, steps 3 and 4 have to be figured out before 1 and 2, or in a year or 2 this would have to be re-done, maybe expensively..

So back we come to, there's a lot more to it.

I would suggest that non garden designers can train their eye to what they like and and what appears beautiful if they spend some time really looking at gardens and individual plants, and even more importantly, the natural surroundings to get ideas for their own garden. It might be as simple as clipping photos of appealing gardens from magazines, taking digital or 35 mm photos of appealing natural areas within your region, or driving the neighborhood to find examples of gardens that appeal to you.

The next step might involve trying to analyze the characteristics that you find appealing, and don't just concentrate on the particular plants, colors, etc., but instead think it through in terms of the feelings it gives you; i.e., is wide open and spacious, enclosed and contemplative, restful, dynamic, exotic, familiar, etc. It also helps to really be honest with yourself about what you want your garden to be. Is it just for you and/or your family? Are you trying to compete with the neighbors, or is the potential status of a new garden an important consideration? Also it is really important to consider the longer term costs of maintenance and time required to keep the garden going. As well, try to think longer term in what you want the garden to be and do, which really affects how closely to plant things, what initial sizes will best suit your requirements, etc.

I always try to elicit responses to these less obvious concerns before I start a design. I also prefer to work with clients who are referrals from previous clients, as they are more familiar with my work and are already self-selecting. I also really like to take potential clients to see my gardens and ask questions as to what appeals or not in each. I also find that opening my client's gardens on garden tours is a good way to get exposure to potential clients, and recommend garden tours to the public as a way to get more exposure to all the variety of designs and designer approaches. Visiting historic gardens/houses and botanic gardens is another approach to see and define your preferences from the enormous pallette of plants that can potentially be used in your own garden design.

It may be heretical to say this, but a garden is an artifical construct, and does not have any specific rules as to what makes it work for any one person. If you are philosphically drawn to using natives and trying to create a garden that is not so dependent on constant work and resources to keep it going, you will not be happy with a formal garden of boxwood and roses. If a garden that appears similar to the untouched surroundings is not your idea of a garden, you won't want to hire a designer that specializes in the minimalist, naturalist approach.

My favorite clients are the ones that feel a garden is both a refuge from the daily grind, and should be beautiful in its own right. I also enjoy the opportunity to incorporate art or influences from foreign travel into the garden design, and especially enjoy it when an initial non-gardener gets involved with gardening as a result of their newly created garden. Just coming off a garden tour this past weekend where over 1000 people came through a small 2000 square foot garden in one day, after viewing 13 distinctively different gardens and styles, it was interesting to question visitors about what they did/didn't like about the various gardens. I'll confess that I find it a little disappointing when the average visitor only sees the plants currently most showy in bloom, to the exclusion of all else. But there were certainly enough visitors who also "got" the larger picture, and were intrigued by the constrasts of the architecture brought out into the garden and contrasted with the abundance of riotous plantings to soften it. To have others notice the attention to details of matching flower and foliage colors to the house colors, and asking questions about the mix of hot and cool colors, dry and tropical plants, were the visitors I spent the most time conversing with. It was also interesting that out of over 150 different species of plants in the garden, there were only about 5 or 6 that elicited the most questions. As the garden and house will also be featured in a future issue of a national garden magazine, it will be interesting to see what the garden editor and photographer will see. After having the garden photographed by several other nationally known photographers, it is also interesting to see that each photographer captures different things. The end result, is that I do enjoy sharing my art with a wider public, and also learn that I can't please everyone, and shouldn't even try. It is enough to hear the client tell me that they enjoy their own garden more all the time, and to get their suggestions for how they would like to see the garden evolve, or give me thoughts on what they'd like to do diffently on the next project...