trees
Wiktor Bochenek: What is it like with the trees by the windows? Do they really cause that much of a problem?
Joanna Rayss: It actually happens to be a huge problem for residents, which I think is a huge misunderstanding. Based on the assumption that it's best to buy an apartment with south-facing windows, so that "nothing will block the sun from us," we usually fall into our own trap. When the summer heat comes and the light coming in through the southern windows is glaring, making it impossible to work, we then hide behind blinds and look for air conditioners. On the other hand, a deciduous tree shading the south window gives us wonderful shade in the summer, and when autumn and winter come and we crave light those dreaded leaves are gone. I firmly believe that there is no better air conditioning system than a deciduous tree, especially on the south side. I myself have huge windows in the house shielded by a pergola with vines, providing perfect shade in summer. Our office, on the other hand, is admittedly on the fourth floor, but a beautiful birch tree grows near the window where my desk is located. In this cloudy autumn season, the orange birch shoots with tiny "catkins" of blossoms is something that lifts my mood! I wish everyone such a view outside the window! This birch absolutely does not obstruct our window. Sometimes we tell ourselves the problem with leaves and trees in general - completely unnecessarily.
A flowering meadow in an estate setting
© Rayss Group
I think it's a matter of understanding and attitude. However, I must admit that I actually not infrequently support clients who receive complaints from new residents who do not like the trees planted near their windows, and I mean situations of plants planted at the correct distances from the walls of buildings. I even have the impression that sometimes these are even the same people who fight very fiercely over trees growing on "other people's" plots, far from their windows and properties. I am glad in this situation that my clients, along with me, are fighting for this new and preserved greenery. The commonly held myth of the bad developer can sometimes be very hurtful. There are people working in this industry who also love vegetation. Of course, pat-developers exist and need to be fought against, but good examples should also be shown and supported.
approach
Wiktor Bochenek: How is the approach of institutions to green space design changing?
Joanna Rayss: I must admit that I see a positive change. I myself am getting more and more invitations to expert events, conferences and workshops from the water and wastewaterindustry. There are a lot of people working there who are open to finding new, nature-based methods of managing, treating and recycling water. I am convinced that this is because it is the local government sewerage units that are dealing with the effects of climate change, such as flooding and waterlogging. They are responsible for these problems, so they are actively seeking various solutions. GWOR [Stormwater and Meltwater Management - editor's note] is the most well-known conference on water and sewerage issues, the organizers of which are in permanent substantive cooperation with the Landscape Architecture Association, in which I have been active for several years. Substantive contributions are expected, precisely in the form of nature education, knowledge of ecosystem services and green infrastructure. Lectures on the practical aspects of Urban Surface Retention Systems based on retention greenery are highly anticipated. This is in truth a big change. With sadness I have to admit that currently I see the least interest in these issues from the broader architectural industry, leaving aside, of course, individual cases of specific studios with which I cooperate on specific projects.
Tall grasses are also an important part of green space design
© Rayss Group
Wiktor Bochenek: Really?
Joanna Rayss: I say this with my hand on my heart. Not a single branch of SARP, not a single unit of the Chamber of Polish Architects has ever asked for support or cooperation in, for example, organizing substantive training for architects. Neither to me nor to SAK [Association of Landscape Architecture - editor's note]. Even periodicals devoted to architecture are not particularly interested in greenery or retention greenery. Architecture & Business was the first of this milieu to take an interest in the subject of landscape architecture and greenery. And it is architects, after all, who create local plans and design cubic objects in urban spaces. This professional group generates problems related to sealing the urban catchment area, so it is they who should be directly interested in minimizing the negative effects of urbanization and hydrological compensation. However, I have the impression that it is interested the least.
Wiktor Bochenek: What do you think this is due to?
Joanna Rayss: Maybe from the underestimation of my industry, which is sometimes perceived as a group of people from "planting flowers." Maybe we ourselves as a community have also earned this - landscape architecture education has an unstandardized educational program at universities, in addition, we have no professional title and no industry credentials. Because of this, it is the architects who create "park building" projects that then do not work from an ecological perspective. Ecosystem ecology should be more empowering in teaching architects. Yes, I have a lot of friends and acquaintances among architects also among university lecturers. Many of them invite me to give guest lectures in their classes. However, these are individual initiatives and not a systemic action, which rather removes landscape architecture and nature in general from the curricula of architecture and urban planning.... I even sometimes have the impression that the problem is a greater fascination of architects with fancy technologies, artificial intelligence, sophisticated materials, and nature, plants, "bushes" are, yes, interesting decoration in the visualization, but seemingly difficult to translate into the language of designs and "serious" technical solutions.
Joanna Rayss
© Rayss Group
Wiktor Bochenek: Do you see a change in the approach to greenery?
Joanna Rayss: Such changes are taking place. It is the result of the work of very many people. Nature education in schools is certainly at a higher level than it was a few or certainly a dozen years ago. There is also grassroots work by many experts who popularize the issues of climate change, biodiversity and the environment. I myself am also trying to prove that a landscape architect is nevertheless an engineer who, using this "frivolous" greenery, can solve serious problems.
Wiktor Bochenek: How do developers react to the need to introduce green areas?
Joanna Rayss: An informed and well-educated designer should be able to properly explain the benefits that greenery gives us. I myself see an ever-increasing openness to greenery working with the developers I work with (fortunately, with pat-developers I have the pleasure of not working). In addition, new positive trends are emerging, such as our Polish green building certificate dedicated to residential construction, [issued by: Polish Green Building Association - editor's note], which focuses on increasing the natural value of green areas, but also, for example, on retention issues. Investors are becoming more serious about the issue of inspector supervision in the greenery industry at the construction site we verify the reality of greenery on visualizations not only in terms of compliance with the project, but also with what is potentially available in nurseries - especially in the case of plant size. This is evidence that attitudes are changing. Recently, for example, I was asked to send a catalog of native plants used by me in estate greenery projects by one of my most important clients, who is creating a catalog of positive pro-environmental solutions for its shareholders. I can't imagine such situations even ten years ago. In the past, my designs either landed in a drawer or were treated as loose sketches, to be optimized by the contractor. Today, they are not only implemented, but also supervised. We all benefit from such solutions.
mosquito problem
Wiktor Bochenek: Water areas can appear more often in the complaints of residents than the neighboring trees. They talk about fetor, mosquitoes and other problems. Are these problems real, and if so, what do they stem from?
Joanna Rayss: Yes, in fact these proverbial mosquitoes appear whenever we talk about greenery and retention. People are afraid of something when they don't know it. They have an image of mud and insects, because there are still few good examples of well-designed and implemented such greenery around us. Good retention greenery is not ponds, areas where water stands all the time. By design, the retention systems that I design are small depressions of land. Such rain gardens are filled with water by design only periodically. Mosquitoes need several days in constant water to hatch. Besides, greater biodiversity leads to frogs, birds and other creatures that eat these mosquitoes in addition to mosquitoes. If a water area is made so that there is only standing water and concrete, there will only be mosquitoes. We want to move toward environmental self-regulation.
I'll frankly admit that I haven't heard a single complaint yet from settlements with large retention systems, which are already operating for the fourth or fifth year in Gdansk. We know of complaints from all over Poland about mosquito infestations, where such design does not occur.
Wiktor Bochenek: In the face of inexorable climate change, what should be the priority for cities that want to adapt to what awaits the planet in the next 30 years?
Joanna Rayss: In my opinion, adaptation should be closely linked to mitigation, and this is much easier if the tool for adaptation is greenery and green infrastructure in the broadest sense. Without greenery and water, cities are unable to conduct a rational and comprehensive climate policy. A proper climate policy should be based not only on decarbonization and improving air quality, but also on calculating the loss of air quality and increasing the negative CO2 balance with the removal of greenery, or even with an insufficient share of greenery in the city's fabric, which should, in my opinion, be linked to "climate" goals . Especially in the case of industrial, infrastructure and storage investments, which contribute the most to the deterioration of environmental quality and emission rates. Offsetting is my key word, which has come up repeatedly in this conversation and should also appear more widely in city and regional strategies. Offsetting and ecosystem-based design. That's all there is to it.
Wiktor Bochenek: Thank you for the interview!
