TERRACES AND TERRACE GARDENS. 



Grass banks 

 or walls. 



jo- a' 



FIG. III. 



Treatment 

 of terrace 

 walls 



There are numerous ways of doing this, but either walls or grass banks are the ones 

 usually adopted. 



Grass banks have the advantage as regards first cost, but, on the other hand, there is 

 the constant cost of upkeep to be considered, which may make the wall really cheaper in the 

 end. Where grass banks are adopted, they should slope at an angle which will give a rise 

 of one foot in every two feet of horizontal breadth. Not only is this a most convenient 

 slope to fit steps to, but a steeper bank is very apt to " burn " in hot weather, that is 



to say, it is so naturally dry 

 that the grass is scorched 

 and deadened. On the 

 other hand, a natter bank 

 is apt to give a very un- 

 decided line of demarcation 

 between the levels it 

 separates. ^Esthetic considerations are usually all in favour of a wall. Not only is a flower 

 bed difficult to arrange satisfactorily at the foot of a slope, but the bank will usually 

 remain a bare expanse of shaven grass and therefore not be sufficiently differentiated 

 from the lawns above and below, whereas the wall would very soon be garnished with a mass 

 of roses and other free-flowering climbers. Where the difference of level between the two 

 terraces is unusual in either way, a wall is again indicated, for very deep banks are 

 difficult to mow and very shallow ones are 

 ineffective. Quite a terraced effect can be 

 got with a difference of level of as little as 

 one foot, if supported by a dwarf wall with 

 the coping standing about six inches above 

 the higher ground level, but with a grass 

 bank such a slight rise would usually be 

 almost entirely lost. Such a wall may be seen 

 on the plan of a garden at Berkhamstead, 

 shown in illustration No. 385. In many cases, 

 again, the amount of ground occupied by a 

 bank is a consideration. If a wall is sub- 

 stituted it can be saved for a broad border 

 at its foot (see 111. No. in). 



Most garden lovers prefer a wall over- 

 grown with climbers, yet are deterred from 

 erecting one, fearful of incurring the cost of 

 such a feature, and therefore adopt a slope 

 laid down with grass, or planted either in 

 an informal manner or with a variety of 

 shrubs. The cost of a wall, however, depends 

 entirely on its elaboration and enrichment. 

 If the architectural character of the house 

 demands in its immediate vicinity a pierced 

 or balustraded finish, which of itself may 

 cost twenty shillings per foot run or even more for the pierced work only, the outlay, 

 for an extent of wall so erected, would, of course, be heavy, but there are comparatively 

 few occasions on which such elaboration would be in keeping with the architecture. 



Where they are not discordant with the scale and effect of the house, terrace walls 

 of simple design, built in local material, may often answer all purposes more effectively 

 than elaborate erections, and, when covered with hardy climbers, look equally interesting, 



FIG. 112. 



