The Right Way to Plan Walks, Lawns and Beds— By w. s. Rogers 



MAKING A PROPER BALANCE BETWEEN THE THREE MAIN FACTORS OF THE GARDEN PLAN SO AS TO 

 SECURE THE BEST EFFECTS IN SMALL GARDENS AND GIVE A SENSE OF AS MUCH SPACE AS POSSIBLE 



IN THE evolution of the garden design 

 the beds (in which term I include 

 borders) should receive first consideration. 

 They may well occupy more space than 

 is usually allowed them. The narrow 

 strips of border, so often seen skirting the 

 fences of suburban gardens, are practically 

 useless for flower culture. A width of 

 6 feet is not too much for the principal 

 border, and it should be, if possible, in 

 full sun. If the main path defines its 

 near boundary, another border parallel 

 to it may be made on the other side of 

 the path, but narrower, say 4 feet wide. 

 This disparity in width is designed to 

 secure variety, and to eliminate one- 

 sidedness. Two such borders, the wide 

 one planted with shrubs and herbaceous 

 plants, the narrow one with surface- 

 growing flowers, become complementary, 

 and offer opportunity for many charming 

 effects, and for the creation of a fine vista. 

 The narrow border would on one side abut 

 on the grass plot, and short transverse 

 extensions of it might be carried into the 

 grass area to break its inner line and to 

 extend the flower space laterally. Such 

 off-shoots from a long border become 

 partial screens, helping to secure that 

 quality which I have already referred to as 

 "reticence" (See The Garden Magazine, 

 Nov. iQio, p. 174). 



It is by no means necessary that every 

 border should be served by a path. On 

 the contrary, variety of effect is assisted 

 by introducing a border between the grass 

 and the boundary fence, say on the side 

 of the garden opposite to the main walk. 

 These points I shall further elucidate 

 when I come to consider special examples. 

 The main point to emphasize is that the 

 borders, in which the gardener aims at 

 securing his principal flower display, be 

 in full sun, and served by the principal 

 path. These borders must be the domi- 

 nating factor in the design, for they con- 

 stitute the "garden" in the truest sense 

 of the word. The path is for utility, the 

 grass for repose, and both must be subor- 

 dinate to the beds and borders. 



Just how the further elaboration of 

 the scheme is contrived will depend upon 

 circumstances and the fancy of the garden- 

 maker. If the garden is of considerable 

 length it may be advisable to divert the 

 path before it has traversed the full extent 

 of the plot. How this may be done with- 

 out sacrificing the welfare of the flowers, 

 and with best results to the garden picture, 

 we will discuss later. The introduction 

 of detached beds also is a matter in which 

 the taste of the designer is the only guide. 

 One expedient is to allow the path to 

 expand into a square at some points of 

 its length, and to install a square bed in 

 its centre. This is a very convenient 



device when it is required to effect a slight 

 deviation in the path without altering 

 its direction, as the path may enter the 

 square at one corner, and 

 leave it by the diagonally 

 opposite corner. 



Beds in grass, when set 

 near its boundary, should 

 be allowed a verge of at 

 least eighteen inches, to 

 avoid difficulties in mow- 



Method of 

 diverting 

 a straight 

 walk 



ing. 



The use of circles and 

 parts of circles, as well as 

 of figures in which the 

 angles are equal and not 

 less than a right-angle — 

 the hexagon, for example 

 — is~ not opposed to the 

 rectilinear system of treatment. They be- 

 come mere details, in no special way related 

 to the leading lines of the garden plan. 



Though the principal borders should 

 usurp the best position in the garden, 

 there is no reason why the gardener should 

 not make a border in the shade, where he 

 may grow such plants as thrive best under 

 that condition. The foot of a south 

 boundary fence is well suited for a shady 

 border, because it is warm as well as shady. 

 Ferns, lily-of- the- valley, and Solomon 's- 

 seal would thrive in such a border. 



When the house does not stand squarely 

 within its boundaries, or when the garden 

 boundaries are straight but not rectangular, 

 the problem requires some special con- 

 sideration; but usually means may be 

 devised to bring the garden details into 

 harmony. 



Besides this, paths have a utility value 

 in linking together the other elements of 

 the garden. Moreover, it is an objective 

 invitation to walk through the garden and 

 enjoy its beauties. A garden without a 

 path would hardly satisfy the eye. On the 

 other hand, nothing is so wasteful of space, 

 or so irritating to the eye, as a multitude of 

 paths cutting up the garden into small 

 compartments and destroying the breadth 

 of the picture. 



There should be two principal points 

 in every path, the beginning and the end. 

 Paths which start nowhere and end at 

 a blank wall suggest purposelessness. It 

 may be taken as an axiom that the prin- 

 cipal path should commence at some 

 point conveniently near, and preferably 

 facing, the door by which the house in- 

 mates enter their garden. Its direction 

 should be through the flowers, and it 

 should have a natural destination. The 

 best terminal to a garden path in my 

 opinion is the summer-house, and when 

 that feature is non-existent an arbor, or 

 some other erection, should serve the pur- 

 pose. Failing that, the path might ter- 



84 



minate in a square expansion, in which 

 a seat, sundial, or other appropriate object 

 might be placed. It would be better to 

 end it at a bicycle or motor house, or even 

 at a pretty shed, than to allow it to stop 

 suddenly nowhere. 



Diagonal paths are not permissible in 

 a small garden. All deviations in direction 

 should be made at right-angles. 



The value of a path is mainly in propor- 

 tion to its utility. After rain or heavy 

 dew the garden would be uninviting with- 

 out a path. It also preserves the turf 

 from traffic which would soon wear it 

 to bareness. This sums up the path's 

 usefulness. I have seen it laid down that 

 the smaller the garden the more the need 

 for the "winding path," to add to the 

 "apparent length of the garden." I 

 cannot conceive that any such result 

 could follow in a garden the boundaries 

 of which are visible on every side. The 

 winding path in a small plot serves only 

 to cut up the space into irregularly shaped 

 areas, hard to deal with successfully, 

 whilst the additional amount of gravel 

 surface is so much deducted from what 

 might be made productive ground. I do 

 not favor a less width than 3 feet for a 

 principal path under any circumstances. 



In larger gardens greater width may be 

 permitted, as there is a certain distinction 



1 



Provide some "excuse" for turning and expanding 



a walk 



