
This is so silly that I sort of like it. I mean, I found it to be sufficiently amusing to get a picture of it to send to Brent. It is a nice large urn, with an Aeonium arboreum that is a bit bolder than any of mine, and delightfully blue Senecio mandraliscae. It has nothing else going for it, but perhaps its simplicity is an asset. It might look junky if it contained any other well planned but comparably maintained material.
My only personal criticism of its design is that it is located on otherwise useful pavement, where pedestrian traffic must divert around it; but I am merely a horticulturist, not a landscape designer. For all I know, it could be there to intentionally soften the expansiveness of all that useful pavement, without occupying too much of it. I would also say that the urn should be outfitted with species that are more tolerant of the partial shade of its particular exposure, but obviously, these two simple species are reasonably happy there.
My more realistic criticism is of its implementation. Is it really too difficult for so-called maintenance ‘gardeners’ to maintain this as the landscape designer who designed it thought they should be able to? Must landscape designers design their landscapes with the expectation that their work will not be maintained as expected? Although it is delightfully silly, it might be more visually appealing if the Senecio mandraliscae cascaded a bit more over the edge. Alternatively, it could be confined to the upper surface of the urn if a third perennial were allowed to cascade somewhat over the edge; but again, I am no landscape designer. The urn is nice, but might be nicer with a bit of foliar color, form and texture over some of its exterior.


















