2011 Seed Round-Up

Posted on February 15, 2012 by

Gardening is, by its very nature, the triumph of optimism over experience.
William Alexander, The $64 Tomato

I will honestly tell you that I came very close not to publishing my annual seed review this year.

2011 was one of the most miserable years that I’ve experienced in the vegetable garden in at least a decade. How shall I count the ways? Well, let’s see: a winter with constant snow on the ground for 4 months that caused an almost biblical proliferation of rodents of all types: moles, voles, mice, which ate everything within miles, including girdling several major trees; then came a long, cold, wet spring which retarded plant growth but cheered on every type of mildew and fungus, followed by a cool, wet summer, which did the same; then Hurricane Irene on Labor Day, which flattened out what had managed not to rot out, and then the coup de grace, the Halloween snowstorm which dumped seven inches of wet, slushy snow on the few pumpkins I’d managed to harvest, took out a quarter of the large trees in town, and shut off our power for 5 days.

Still, I decided that there must be something to be learned from all this – if only perhaps what crops are so indestructible as to survive such levels of calamity. So, here it goes:

Bean, Pole ‘Nor’easter’ Still the best bean in the business; flat tasty pods are delicious even when let to grow on the big side; not that I got to taste any last summer, as the rabbits ate them to the ground, twice, and the plants just gave up.
Beet ‘Red Ace’ Managed to eat of few of these before the chipmunks destroyed the crop; excellent flavor
Belgian Endive ‘Totem’ Small plants which failed to mature sufficiently for forcing; definitely climate conditions, not the cultivar
Cucumber ‘Alibi’ Excellent production, despite conditions
Cucumber ‘Diva’ This is my second time growing this Diva, and for the second time she sang off key; poor yields.
Leek ‘Lexton’ A very expensive new variety from Johnny’s, with little or no improvement over older cultivars. My two favorite leek varieties still remain ‘King Richard’ and ‘Giant Musselburgh’
Pepper , Sweet Ace Even in this miserable year, this variety managed to produce a few peppers. This year I am starting my plants much earlier (now, in the greenhouse) to be able to set out larger sized plants directly into the garden in May – ones that aren’t so likely to be trampled by foraging ducks… (don’t ask)
Pumpkin ‘Polar Bear’ The only one of four varieties to bear; the large white fruits are an interesting novelty; I prefer the blue of  Jarrahdale – especially when viewed under six inches of snow.
Radish ‘Red Meat’ Tasty! (And fast enough to mature to beat out most disasters, natural or otherwise.)
Radish ‘Rover’ Another great radish
Radish ‘Shunkyo’ Specialty radish with excellent flavor
Squash Buttercup, Burgess Strain This is rapidly becoming my favorite winter squash; keeps well with a nutty, intense flavor. This year I am trying a new, larger “improvement” ‘Bon Bon’ from Johnny’s, as well as Kabocha, which I have grown in the past and much enjoyed both for taste and show.
Tomato ‘Defiant’ This was the biggest loser this year. With extremely expensive seed (4.95 for 15 seeds from Johnny’s), ‘Defiant’ is supposedly resistant to Late Blight, but in fact was the first tomato in my garden to succumb, even before the heirlooms. What little fruit was harvested was of poor taste,  barely above store-bought flavor.
Tomato ‘Pink Beauty’ This hybrid variety has consistently held up under adverse conditions; great flavor, heirloom quality fruit and taste with increased disease resistance.
Tomato ‘Rose’ Excellent yield, excellent flavor, relatively good disease resistance
Tomato ‘Sungold’ Still my favorite of all cherries

So, on to 2012!

Posted in Boston landscape design, From the Kitchen Garden, General landscape design, Green gardening, History of food, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Gardening, Organic gardening | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Garden Renovation Primer: Building a Sunken Garden

Posted on February 8, 2012 by

Under the old mantra that you can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs, we are about to break a few dozen in starting our new sunken garden.

Why, you may ask, build a sunken garden in the first place? Good question, to which the short answer is: drama. In the same way that architects use changes in level to define space indoors, we use the same theories outdoors, for the same reasons. Raising, or lowering a section of the landscape defines a space in a way that no other method, such as a fence or hedge could, allowing a clear delineation of purpose without blocking an area from view. Changes of level also provide for a much more fluid and dynamic experience as the user moves through the garden. Yes, I know, that sounds like a lot of architect-speak, and it is. In plain English, sunken gardens are visually effective and fun to be in. Here in our project, the main reason for sinking a section of the garden is to separate the small games lawn from the rest of a flower-filled, romantic landscape.

Unfortunately, for something so simple in principle, a sunken garden turns out to be a very complicated creature. Not only does it have to retain a vast amount of weight (the whole yard, in fact) but improperly constructed, it can quickly turn into an underwater garden with the first heavy downpour.

The style of the wall construction is also extremely important. Retaining walls can be made from all sorts of materials: wood, cut stone, natural stone, even concrete. Which you choose will make a very large difference to the final aesthetic. For the Cambridge project, we’ve chosen thermaled (half-smoothed) granite. Essentially granite “tiles” twelve inches wide, 2″ thick, and of random lengths up to 4′, these pieces of stone were designed to mimic the antique granite blocks that form the foundation of our home. Historically, a garden wall like this might have been made out of solid stone blocks, but these days we rarely do that for cost reasons. The under-layment of our wall is double row of concrete block, set on a concrete footing, to which granite facia pieces and capping stones will be applied. It sounds a bit complicated, but it really isn’t, as you will see. (Think how kitchen or bathroom tiles are mounted, and you begin to get the general picture.)

What is true is that it’s a big mess to construct.

The fist stage of the process is to rough out the excavation and start digging:

Here’s another shot giving you a better idea of the extent of the excavation. You may be wondering what happens to all the soil. Well, had the soil been of a good quality, it might of been reused on site, or even sold. But unfortunately for us, despite it’s deep color, this is mostly clay. In fact, the entire yard sits atop a hill of clay. (In the Colonial era there was a brick kiln just down the street.) So for our purposes, everything that comes out of this hole needs to be hauled away, and that’s a lot of hauling: the walls themselves are two feet deep, and they sit on a concrete foundation that extends down a further several feet…

Below you can clearly see the structure of the walls: the footing has already been poured, on top of which sits a double concrete block wall, filled with aggregate, to which the 2″ thick granite pieces are attached with mortar. The white PVC forms the drainage system, which in our case leads to a large drywell on the far edge of the property. The large gaps in the wall you see are for the solid granite, oval stairs, which haven’t yet arrived from the quarry in Vermont.

Now, as the walls take shape, the men slowly work themselves out of the whole, completing the structure from front (house-side) to back (driveway side).

Ah, a change of plans! You may remember from my earlier articles that I had proposed a water feature for this garden, but that the clients nixed the idea on the initial plans. However, as the garden evolved they had a change of heart, and asked me how they could incorporate some water into the landscape. I had just the idea: we cancelled the far stair leading down into the games lawn, and instead I designed a fountain that would have the same shape as the stairs, but in negative space. I know that’s a little hard to envision, but you’ll see what I mean in a moment. Below, the guys are forming the walls of the oval basin in concrete. (We chose to pour a concrete basin, by the way, rather than using fiberglass or liner, for longevity’s sake – this is not the kind of thing you ever want to have to replace!

I suppose I should also say a word or two about design changes-on-the fly like this one. Unlike building a house, where one small alteration to the plans can send the whole project spiraling into a budget abyss, building a garden allows you a certain level of planning flexibility, if you move agilely enough. I like to work this way, if the clients are amenable: If you are a good designer, you gain a vast sensibility for a project as it progresses, and sometimes that means you (or the client) suddenly realize an element of the design can be improved upon.You have to be flexible however, and allow for the idea of the design maturing as the work progresses. If you’re the type of person who needs to have every “i” dotted and “t” crossed before you start, (or if you are on a very tight budget) then this kind of thing can be very nerve-wracking and isn’t for you. Work methods are important though, and I always discuss this process with my clients beforehand; some like the idea, some don’t, and we can work either way. (I do, however, think a flexible mind-set produces a better end-product.) In our case, altering the stair and inserting the pool was a cost negative proposition, and to my mind, really enhances the pleasure of the final design.

This shot gives you a good idea of how the stairs are constructed. They are quite complicated really, and had to be hand-cut from a template we supplied to the quarry. From top to bottom: a granite partial oval on ground level, then a solid half oval, upon which sits a solid granite full 2 x 4′ oval (you can see one on the left) and then finally, behind that, the solid capping stone with a half 2 x 4′ oval cut out of it. The two guys in the blue to the right are about to strap and secure the solid capping stone piece so the machine can lift the granite into place. Each section weighs well more that a thousand pounds.

Here’s a view of the finished stair, with the footings of the summer pavilion in the ground to the rear. Now you can clearly see the four elements that make up the stairs. You can also see how the 2′ wide granite capping stones give the appearance of a solid stone wall, at a fraction of the cost.

And so, a few days later, with the stonework completed, and after a special sand/compost mix is added to insure good drainage, we have the start of a games lawn! From here, you can get a better idea of how the oval pond mimics the exact shape of the stairs, except in reverse, with a concave rear wall.

A view looking back towards the house. From the first picture to last, five weeks have elapsed.

And finally, another view back towards the fountain, with a trial urn & fountainhead in place to measure scale. But I’m getting ahead of myself here: determining that, and choosing urns, fountainheads, and the rest of the ornamentation are a story for another day.

In the meantime, a quick reminder of where we are headed:  (You can click to expand.)

Posted in Architecture and the Garden, Boston landscape design, Garden Renovation, Garden design history, Garden history, General landscape design, Landscape design for historic homes, Michael Weishan & Associates Portfolio, Michael Weishan and Associates, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Gardening, New England Landscape Design, Ornamental gardening, Period landscape, Traditional Gardening®, Urban gardening | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

February Morning

Posted on February 6, 2012 by

I wanted to share with you one of the delights of February: the sublime witchhazel, Hamamelis x intermedia ‘Arnold Promise.’ This is truly one of my all-time favorite plants, and I think you can see why, seen here in full flower amongst my collection of antique glass. Witchhazels are hugely under-appreciated in American gardens for reasons I’ve never understood. Not only do they flower for a full month, often beginning here in Boston in January, but the branches are wonderful for cutting and bringing inside. No particular forcing technique is needed – just snip and place in a vase – enjoying  the highly fragrant flowers which last almost two weeks indoors. Magnificent! In fact, I’ve started collecting witchhazels; last year I planted a reddish flowering variety ‘Jalena’ and will be adding an even deeper red, ‘Diane’, this spring.

For more on witchhazels, including care instructions for these almost indestructible plants, visit my 2010 article HERE.

Posted in Boston landscape design, Garden Renovation, Garden design history, General landscape design, Landscape design for historic homes, Michael Weishan and Associates, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Gardening, New England Landscape Design, Period landscape, Traditional Gardening® | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Garden Renovation Primer: Building a Brick Terrace

Posted on January 21, 2012 by

Well, with the crazy, snow-less winter here we’ve had here in Boston, I’ve gotten a bit behind in relating the story of our Cambridge garden renovation project, principally because the strange weather has kept me on site and working right into January. But now snow has finally come, so in the next two articles, I’ll be bringing you up to date. Today, I’ll show you the progress on the brick terrace, and next week, I’ll take you step by step through the now finished sunken garden.

So here’s where we were in October, just at the beginning of the patio construction. You can see one of the guys at Lighthouse Landscape preparing the stone dust base:

While I’m not going to go into the specifics of designing brick terraces (I’ve already done that in a previous article, HERE) I do want to explain how I made specific choices for this particular garden. Looking again at the back of the house, you can see that the facade has rather odd fenestration: unlike the front of the house which is perfectly symmetrical, on the back each window and door is a different shape and size. This isn’t all that unusual in old houses – it’s merely the result of design changes over two hundred years and a dozen different occupants, a fact which has now become fixed by historical covenant and can’t be altered. So given that we can’t make changes to the house architecture, what we can do is use the landscape architecture to help even out the visual picture and settle the back of the house into the garden. To accomplish this, I decided to pull a brick terrace across the full width of the back facade, some 40′ feet. Technically I could have designed a patio in any size or shape, as long as it was sufficiently large to accommodate the needs of the owners, but here, I wanted to use the hardscape to link together the various doors and windows into a more cohesive whole.

Next in goes the brick:

Already you can see how the uniformity of the brick surface starts to link together the various doors and windows (not to mention providing enhanced access to the house). Notice too that the terrace is not formed of just simple running bond: instead, there is a framework of running bond surrounding a 1′ bluestone strip, which in turn surrounds an interior laid in the herringbone pattern. These “oriental rug” terraces are something of a trademark of mine – I generally use some variation of this arrangement whenever the design calls for brick. This rug feature is especially important here, given the size of the terrace: without the stone and pattern to provide visual interest, I’d risk creating a brick parking lot.

Here’s the finished terrace, with a the new granite steps linking the two doors that lead into the backyard:

Here you can really see how the combination of brick and stone provide visual interest all year round – not to mention drawing the eye away from the odd back facade of the house. Had I used only stone, for instance, or for that matter, only brick, the result would have been far less dramatic, and far less successful. Which brings up an interesting point: how do you decide on what material to use for your hard surface? Here the choice was easy: this particular brick was historically made just over the hill from where this house sits in Cambridge, and all the surrounding sidewalks are made from the same material. But more importantly, given that I wanted to create a landscape feature of intrinsic interest, the only real possibility was provided by the play of pattern and line that brick provides.

So next time, we’re off to the building of the sunken garden: you can just see a tantalizing hint of it in the picture above, but I won’t spoil the fun –  I think you’ll be truly amazed at the complexity of constructing a feature that appears so simple on paper.

Posted in Architecture and the Garden, Boston landscape design, Garden Renovation, General landscape design, Landscape design for historic homes, Michael Weishan and Associates, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Landscape Design, Period landscape, Traditional Gardening®, Urban gardening | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

More Thalassa Cruso!

Posted on December 28, 2011 by

Those of you who read this column regularly know that I am a huge fan of 60s gardening guru Thalassa Cruso.

Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve gotten a number of letters from various Thalassa fans, thanking me for my earlier efforts in bringing at least one her episodes back from extinction. (For my 2009 tribute to Thalassa, click here.) Frankly, my initial attempt at video restoration was a bit amateurish, with only OK sound and not terribly good picture quality, so with these latest viewer letters as my incentive, I decided to go back and have another crack at the tape we’d transferred to DVD a couple of years ago. I’d always known we had portions of three episodes, but my initial read was that they were merely fragmentary bits. Imagine my surprise, when after a lot of late night prodding and poking, I managed to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again, and restore all three half-hour shows! This time however, the results are much more professional: digital picture quality and stereo sound that goes a long way to restoring gardening’s grande dame to her former glory.  In the first restored episode, Starting From Scratch, Thalassa explains how little equipment is really needed to begin gardening indoors. In the second, Heirlooms from the Supermarket/10-Cent Store, she delves into the best way to grow a worthy indoor plant collection. The last episode features world renowned bonsai expert Connie Derderian teaching a dubious Thalassa how to create this Japanese art form.

So here, once again, may I present the indomitable, the inimitable, the one, the only Thalassa Cruso!

Starting From Scratch (1969)

Heirlooms from the Supermarket/10-Cent Store (1969)

And here’s the re-restored Bonsai from the show’s 1967 season.

Posted in Container gardening, Houseplants, Indoor gardening, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, Ornamental gardening, Traditional Gardening® | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Holiday Greetings

Posted on December 24, 2011 by

Posted in Architecture and the Garden, Boston landscape design, General landscape design, Michael Weishan and Associates, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Landscape Design, Ornamental gardening, Traditional Gardening®, Urban gardening | Leave a comment

The Garden Renovation Primer: Moving Established Trees

Posted on December 14, 2011 by

When renovating an old landscape, almost inevitably you’ll be faced with the issue of what to do with established plantings. On one hand large trees and shrubs add a dignity and grace to a property that is almost impossible to replicate by any means except the passage of time. On the other hand, often poor planning means these fine old specimens are too close together, or shading out other plantings, or simply in the way of a new scheme. Cutting down such established plantings should always be your last option however: what you can destroy in an instant will take decades to replace. Generally, trees and shrubs up 20′ tall or so can be moved to new positions on the property reasonably economically (when viewed against replacement cost) and with a high rate of survivability.

There are essentially two ways to move a large tree or shrub. The easiest is with something called a tree spade, pictured below on a suburban project I did several years back. (Click on any of these pictures for a larger view.)

Appropriately named, a tree spade is exactly that: a large mechanical claw for digging and moving heavy plants. To dig the tree, the two halves of the claw open and encircle the specimen; then the four heavy spades descend vertically into the soil, severing the roots. They then fold together underground, creating a root ball. The tree is lifted out, tipped horizontally across the back of the truck, and is carted off to the new location. To plant, the process is reversed, with the claws literally wedging out the soil to form a hole into which the tree descends. (This is exactly what you see about to happen above. Look closely: there’s a large hinoki cypress, almost identical to the just-planted specimen at the left, within the claw of the spade.) It sounds simple, and it is – in the hands of an experienced operator – and depending on the size of the tree spade (they come in various versions from middling to huge) you can pretty much move any sized tree up to 20-30′ tall. (In case you’re wondering, the tree shown above weighed in at just under 4 tons.) The drawbacks to tree spades are two-fold. The first is cost: a tree spade for a day, with operator, will run about $4000, and can realistically only move 1-4 trees (depending on the distance between digging and plantings sites) in a single day. The second is access: these big machines don’t fit well on small sites with buildings and overhead wires in close proximity, which was exactly the case on our Boston garden renovation project. There, we had a very lovely old American holly, ilex opaca, which both the owners and I insisted be saved. (These plants are quite rare in this part of the world, at the northern extremity of their range.) In the old plan the holly was far too close to its neighbor, but in the new scheme we had the perfect spot for it: in the corner behind our new sunken garden. The question was how to get it there. The answer: ball and burlap, and a lot of digging, pushing & tugging.

So here’s the first part of the process. Russell Gates and his crew at Lighthouse Landscape spent the better part of the morning digging around our holly with an excavator. Once the trenching was complete, they used the front-end loader below to slice underneath the holly, severing the bottom roots, thus allowing the crew to get burlap and ties underneath the root ball:

As the root ball is too heavy to lift to any appreciable height without a tree spade, in order to move the tree to its new location, it has to be dragged along a fairly level roadbed, in this case, a trench Russell dug earlier with his excavator. In the view below, you can see the trench behind two members of Russ’ crew. These gentlemen also give you a good idea of the size of the holly involved, which weighs upwards of 5 thousand pounds.

To move the tree along the track, Russell pulls the chain tied to the root ball with his excavator, while the front end loader pushes. Russell is sitting pretty much where the holly is headed.

And a remarkably, less than an hour later, here’s the holly in its new location, safe, sound and happy in the far corner of the lot. The area in the foreground is precisely where our sunken garden will be built.

In fact, this picture shows almost exactly the same view as the rendering we prepared earlier. There’s the holly in the far corner:

I must say that even after so many years in the business, I find the process of moving from design to reality quite amazing – especially when you combine a group of professionals with precisely the right equipment. One moment it’s there only on paper, and the next, voilà!

Next stop on our project: laying the new back terrace!

Posted in Architecture and the Garden, Boston landscape design, Container gardening, Garden Renovation, Garden design history, General landscape design, Landscape design for historic homes, Michael Weishan & Associates Portfolio, Michael Weishan and Associates, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Gardening, New England Landscape Design, Ornamental gardening, Period landscape, Traditional Gardening®, Urban gardening | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Lessons from Malta

Posted on December 1, 2011 by

A shot I took while hiking the limestone cliffs on the western coast of Malta.

I’m just back from a very interesting 10 days in Malta. Truth be told, it’s not someplace I’d ever intended to visit, but a dear college friend of mine was on sabbatical there this fall, and the invitation seemed too good to turn down. Turns out, it’s quite the place, Malta. A tiny rock of an island not far from the Libyan coast, this miniature nation state has an incredibly long and diverse history dating back over seven thousand years. The oldest architectural remains in Europe are found there (which I toured, spectacular!) and the island has been occupied, in succession, by the Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Normans, Spaniards, and Italians, each helping to produce a remarkable cultural heritage.

Perhaps even more remarkably, Maltese farmers manage to grow a fantastic variety of crops on what is essentially a tree-less block of barren limestone. Of course by November, most of the harvest was already in, but as I traveled about the island, I came upon field after field of the most spectacular leeks I’ve seen in a while, just finishing their long growing year:

This lush growth is all the more remarkable when you take a closer look at the soil:

Those aren’t clumps of dirt you’re looking at, they’re rocks: thousands and thousands of bits of limestone, surrounded by what is, in essence, stone powder. Imagine having to garden in soil like this! Yet the Maltese do, with spectacular results. What’s their secret? Well, it’s two-fold.The first part is adding sufficient organic matter: Maltese fields are lightly manured after each harvest, and this annual dose of organic matter not only feeds the crops, but also helps the soil retain much needed moisture during the dry summer months – something that simply adding fertilizer alone wouldn’t accomplish. The second key to success is knowing when enough organic matter is enough. Simply because a soil is rich doesn’t necessarily guarantee a good garden. In fact, soils can contain too much organic matter, something I learned to my dismay this summer in my own vegetable garden. Last fall, I covered the beds with a good foot or two of leaves as I had the past three seasons, which I dutifully tilled into the soil this past spring. But it seems I overdid it: I added so much composted matter that the drainage was adversely affected, producing a dark, muddy soil that pooled water. Without sufficient air at the roots, my plantings weren’t able to absorb food and moisture properly, and the result was the poor growth I experienced this summer. (Of course, record rains and a hurricane didn’t help either.) Fortunately, the situation is self correcting: by next spring the excess organics will have sufficiently broken down and proper drainage will be restored. (I may also add a bit of grit in the form of sand to help things along.) But in the meantime the lesson is clear: add organic matter regularly but sparingly to your garden, never changing the soil’s composition by more than 20% or so at a time. And above all, maintain good drainage. It’s the sine qua non of successful vegetable gardening, as the clever Maltese will attest.

Posted in Garden Travels, Green gardening, History of food, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New American Victory Garden, New England Gardening, Organic gardening, Traditional Gardening®, Vegetable gardening | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

The Garden Renovation Primer: Evolution

Posted on October 28, 2011 by

My grandfather’s mantra was: plan twice, plant once.

As it turns out, that wasn’t quite accurate.

In reality, it’s plan, plan more, replan, and plan again, and keep planning until the garden you’re searching for finally emerges from the design.

Of course when you’re planning your own garden, you have only one judge to please. Build what you want, plant what you want – you are judge, jury and executor. When, however, you’re working for someone else, things become considerably more complex. I always jokingly warn my clients at the beginning of a project that they’ll wind up with one of two gardens: mine or theirs. Both will be lovely, but one will feel much more like home than the other. The key to achieving a garden design that is unique and individual to you is continual input and feedback throughout the planning stages.

In this article, I’m going to give you some sense of how a garden plan evolves over time. I’m not going to take you through the step-by-step of how to actually draw a plan – those basics I’ve covered already in my books The New Traditional Garden and The Victory Garden Companion. What I would like to describe now is some of the behind-the-scenes work that goes into creating an individualized garden plan.

So, back to our Federal-era house in Boston: after having spent considerable amount of time on site measuring, photographing, cataloging existing conditions, etc., my next step was to meet again with the clients, to get a better feel for exactly what kind of landscape they’re were looking for. In the first article, I’ve already detailed some of the general parameters of what the clients, Mr. And Mrs A., wanted in the new garden. Further discussions, though, brought up some other considerations: Mrs. A was rightly concerned that the south/west exposure of the area off the kitchen would make for overly hot conditions in the summer; she also mentioned her preference for being able to walk through the garden space, often even taking an outdoor route to the car, rather than walking through the house. Mr. A revealed that he was concerned that the garden not look “suburban.” The house, he rightly noted, was unique and quirky, and he wanted a garden to reflect that.

While these might not sound like hugely important design considerations, in reality they were. Take for instance Mrs A.’s point. What she was stating, though in layman’s terms, was that landscapes can be static or kinetic, meaning that you can either participate in them visually, from a far, as you do with a painting, or in a tactile sense, actually experiencing the landscape in sound, touch and scent. Her preference was clearly for the later. Mr. A was also addressing another important issue: the overall impression the final garden would give. Simply put, he wanted something with a bit of visual bang.

A week or so later these discussions led to a very basic plan, essentially just a plot to show how space might be divided in the garden:

The initial site overview plan (click on this and the other plans to enlarge.) At this stage, the garden is more like a furniture layout plan indoors, simply trying to decide what goes where, and how we'll move through the "room."

To orient yourself, you’re looking only at the backyard. West is at the top; south is to the left, The kitchen and family wing of the house are on the bottom and right.  There are five main features to this plan: a large terrace off the kitchen linking various entrances at the back of the house;  a large water feature, called a rill, to provide some sound and motion to the garden; an extensive mixed flower/shrubbery garden area for Mr. A, which would provide both visual interest and privacy from the neighbor to the south; some sort of secondary structure, at this point still in the conception stage, to provide shady summer seating, and a bluestone bordered games lawn with four large corner piers capped with urns. To the south and west, the property was to be surrounded by a yew hedge, which would help hide some irregular fencing and give some additional screening from the neighboring houses as the plants reach their final 10-15′ height.

Always travel with a camera when touring gardens; you never know what might inspire. Here's a rill I saw this summer in the Hudson Valley, which prompted its inclusion in the initial plan I proposed to my clients.

Again, at this stage, these were only suggestions as to how one might utilize the space.

During the course of our next meeting, we reviewed these options. Mrs A liked the idea of the large terrace, and secondary seating area, but was concerned that it not appear too massive or grand. (I also had proposed some sort of classical garden folly, which was adjudged a little to English for New England.) Mr. A liked the terrace & garden idea very much, but thought wasn’t at all convinced about the water feature. (After talking about this at length, I decided to nix the rill. While I am a huge fan of water in the garden, I also know from personal experience how much work it is to maintain these kinds of features, and Mr. A. showed no enthusiasm for such a project, while Mrs. A was ambivalent. That’s a recipe for disaster. As the garden owner, you must either love, or be ready to learn to love, the major features of your garden.)

Most importantly, while Mr. A appreciated the idea of the stone bordered lawn, he was concerned that the end result might lack some of the visual bang he was hoping for, and wondered if something might be added to give a bit of drama to the landscape. In landscape design, “drama” generally means “structure,” so we discussed several options. A series of brick piers with wrought iron chains? Very Fletcher Steele and very French. Too French perhaps. Some sort of wall? Not really appropriate…

Then: How about some sort of change of level, he suggested. A sunken garden?

Hmmm. A brilliant idea. Changes in level, inside or out, are always a dynamic feature, opening up all sorts of opportunities for altered vistas. The problem is they are expensive. I had briefly considered the idea early on, but discarded it as too costly. (You don’t want to give your clients cardiac at the first meeting arrest, after all.) I threw out some ballpark figures for such a plan; again, this was an item that was measured in tens of thousands.

Let’s draw up some plans, and get some estimates, Mr A. decided.

A section of the second layout review, incorporating the ideas from our earlier meetings

Another week, and another plan, the product of our extended back and forth.

So in this version, several major elements have changed. The summer pavilion has shifted from round to rectangular, and moved to the central axis. It was now envisioned as a simple New England structure, cedar roofed with ionic columns. A 2′ sunken garden (really a sunken lawn, as the garden surrounds the lower area, not vice-versa.) has been been added, with four oval granite stairs, and a band of ground cover along the base of the walls. The terrace has been given some additional ornamentation: bluestone banding separates a frame of running bond from a herringbone interior to provide textural interest during the winter months. A small outdoor grilling area has been added off the terrace, and natural stone pathways added through the garden areas to allow the owners to better experience the garden.

But what was this actually going to look like, Mr. And Mrs. A asked?  The elements seemed OK, but both were having trouble visualizing the design in three dimensions.

This is a very common issue, which can be resolved in several ways. One of the easiest and most cost effective methods is simply use spray paint to lay out the proposed sections of the garden. It’s really amazing once you paint out a space: you can almost see the final product. Walks can be judged for width; terraces for furniture sizing, beds and borders for shade patterns.

Here though we had a problem: not only was there a dense thicket in the way, but the layout I was proposing required moving several very large American hollies and other shrubs in order to clear the space. There was no possible way to paint it out before hand. And even if you could, that really wouldn’t give you a feel for the summer house structure or sunken garden I was envisioning.

For a project of this size, cost and complexity, there is really only one solution: a rendering. And knew just the man to do it: architectural artist Jeff Stikeman. A true wizard of design, Jeff can take flat, two dimensional images and bring them to life like few others. He and I had become acquainted several years back while launching the FDR Suite Project, and I was totally amazed at his ability to translate thoughts and impressions into visual reality. So I sent him the plans, and rough sketch of my own showing the stairs, pavilion and orientation I wanted to see in the drawing, and this is what I received back:

The garden! Pretty amazing, huh?

Equipped with the view, Mr. and Mrs. A. could now visualize their new back yard, and gave the initial go ahead for their project. As a final precaution, I suggested clearing out the overgrown plantings, moving the large hollies, and taking one final look in the planning phase before we committed to the final design (that’s the subject of the next article.) In the meantime though, here’s the moral of today’s story: whether you’re working with a designer, or designing a garden for yourself, take the time to plot your proposed landscape out on paper, then play with  possibilities, and think, think think. You’d be amazed what a little brainstorming can do.

And, as Grandpa rightly pointed out, thinking twice is a whole lot easier than digging twice – or thrice.

Posted in Boston landscape design, Garden Renovation, Garden design history, General landscape design, Landscape design for historic homes, Michael Weishan & Associates Portfolio, Michael Weishan and Associates, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Gardening, New England Landscape Design, Ornamental gardening, Perennials, Period landscape, Traditional Gardening®, Urban gardening | Tagged , | 2 Comments

The Garden Renovation Primer: In the Beginning There Was… A Lovely Old House

Posted on October 22, 2011 by

So many of you have asked me for advice on how to renovate old rundown landscapes over the years that I thought I would start a new series of postings taking you through the process step-by-step with one of my actual projects. While specifics differ greatly from one garden to another, design criteria and sequencing remain remarkably similar, which will hopefully constitute a valuable guide for anyone considering such an undertaking.

There should be to a certain voyeuristic appeal in this account: garden building NEVER goes precisely according to plan, so in the course of reading these records you most likely get to see both the highs, and the lows, of the process.

This new series will run on and off for the next year – a fairly common time frame for building a complicated garden – and show the creation of the entire landscape, from conception to completion.

The opening gambit: an 1810 Federal house awaiting a new garden. This is the front view from across the street. Notice the mishmash of odd fencing styles currently running along the sidewalk.

PART ONE: In the Beginning There Was… A Lovely Old House

This past summer, I was contacted by a dynamic couple, let’s call them Mr. and Mrs. A, who had recently purchased a Federal-era house near Boston. Their new home, built in 1810, had been moved to its current 1/3 acre urban site in 1910. The house had belonged to several famous academics over the course of its two centuries, and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It also sits in a well known historic district, a not so minor detail which will have a large impact for our story as we progress, especially for the front yard of the property, which is subject to Historic Commission approval.

The back yard, as seen at our first meeting. The previous owners had had a small vegetable garden near the back door, which may have not been the best idea given the likelihood of high lead levels around an old house. The suggestion of some sort of geometric layout was on the right track, however, and formed the basis for my subsequent thinking. But the wilderness planting surrounding the lawn is both unattractive and wasteful of precious urban garden space.

How to begin? I admit starting a new landscape from scratch can seem daunting to even the initiated. But while the overall number of design possibilities might appear limitless, in reality several basic design tenets very quickly – and helpfully – begin to direct your options.

The first – and by far the most important element to consider – is the house itself. Remember, a plot of land without a house is a field; it’s the addition of the structure that converts plot to lot. The structure in this case, a rambling Federal, had had many additions over the course of the centuries -– some rather quirky –  but still maintained a very classical feel. With strong symmetrical relationships in both the facade and fenestration, my initial thoughts were that the garden should share this fairly linear geometry, to be mitigated with flowing, colorful planting, and the clients, who too were concerned about creating an appropriately styled garden, agreed. (Notice I didn’t use the word “formal” to describe the layout, though in fact that would have been perfectly appropriate here. Many people associate the world “formal” with “stuffy,” but that’s not at all the case. A formal style simply refers to the straight-line geometric nature of the layout, as opposed to a free-flowing, curvy feel of say, a woodland garden. In this particular case, the lesson of what not to do was extremely clear: the lot had been landscaped only a decade ago with a very loose style of woodland garden, which quickly degenerated into an overgrown tangle. It’s important to remember that the second you finish work outdoors, nature immediately begins to obfuscate the line: plants grow over walls, trees rise overhead, moss grows on the brick. In short: if you start with a tumble, you’ll end with a jumble.)

The roof balustrade, with beautifully turned spindles. Architectural details like these should inspire the garden design.

The second important factor to consider is the lifestyle of the owners; how did they plan to use the space? Were there young children involved? (In this case, no; all grown, so no need for play areas, etc.) Did the owners need space for particular outdoor activities, such as a pool or tennis court? (No.) Were they avid gardeners, occasional putterers, or totally disinterested in working the landscape themselves? (Putterers.) This last question may sound strange, but accurately gauging the gardening interest of the principals is a hugely important factor in the ultimate success of the design –  landscapes go down hill very quickly where there is neither the enthusiasm to garden nor the desire to pay someone else to do so. And what about overall style? In this case, the owners wished to have an open, flower-filled landscape that blended indoors and out. (This last was key, as Mrs. A explained: “Having lived for a while in Manhattan, what I missed most was the ability to throw open the French doors and experience the outdoors. The possibility of doing just that is what drew us to this house.”) Mr. A was adamant about flowers: having grown up in California, he missed the fragrance and color of his home state, and wished to create something of that same feel here. Fortunately, the situation of the backyard, protected from the north by a wing of the house, would create an ideal area for sunny gardening.

Finally come realistic discussions about a budget: At this point, I’ve discovered that it’s wise to scare clients a bit: many people don’t have the vaguest conception of what garden-building costs, and are shocked to learn it’s often as expensive as home construction. However, there is clearly no point planning a $75,000 renovation if the actual funds at hand are $20K, so it pays for both parties to be realistic right up front, even if that means losing or postponing a project. No one, least of all me, likes unpleasant financial surprises once underway. In the case of Mr. and Mrs. A, they had previous experience with a large suburban house & garden, so were aware of the cost implications of the project we were discussing, which was in essence a complete rebuild of the front, back and side yards, including entirely new hardscape, planting, and 170′ of custom built historically accurate fence for the front. These wouldn’t come cheaply, they knew. My initial read to them was that the budget would be measured in tens of thousands, not in singles.

While there are some really lovely specimens buried in this jumble, including several spectacular ilex opaca, American Hollies, the planting has been allowed to become overgrown and form a dense, impenetrable thicket. Rustic designs like these rarely work in urban environments.

(How much can you expect to spend on these kinds of total renovation projects? The general rule of thumb is 5-10% of the house’s current value – which you would expect to recover presuming a 5-10 year occupancy. Spending more than that is certainly possible, but if you do, you are spending for yourself, not for investment return.)

So with the designer and clients in agreement regarding the overall look and feel of a new garden, what’s next?

The first generation of plans of course, which will be the subject of part II!

Posted in Architecture and the Garden, Boston landscape design, Garden Renovation, Garden design history, Garden history, Landscape design for historic homes, Michael Weishan & Associates Portfolio, Michael Weishan and Associates, Michael Weishan's World of Gardening, New England Gardening, Ornamental gardening, Perennials, Period landscape, Traditional Gardening® | Tagged , | Leave a comment