Land Studio Director and Landscape Architect Kate Richards believes design that cares for nature and people is the only design that lasts.
She says that by translating ecological standards into health metrics and securing the governance to sustain them, architects can deliver places that are not only greener, but healthier and more resilient for the long term. Read on for the full article.
The conversation about green infrastructure has shifted. Where Building with Nature (BwN) once spoke primarily to biodiversity, water management and ecological quality, Building for a Healthy Life (BHL) reframes those ambitions through a public‑health lens: how design choices translate into everyday mental and physical wellbeing.
At the same time, the government’s draft national design guidance, currently out for consultation, raises expectations for nature, climate resilience and liveability in new developments. Together these strands create a practical moment for architects to show how ecological rigour and health outcomes can be delivered in the same design.
In our presentation to AEW Architects last year, we argued that “green infrastructure must be designed for people and nature together, not as an afterthought.”
That remains the central premise here: good GI is not a luxury add‑on, but a core component of healthy, resilient places. The draft guidance strengthens that case by asking designers to demonstrate how schemes deliver nature recovery, accessible green space and climate adaptation as part of the baseline of good design.
Policy context and why it matters
The draft national design guidance reframes design quality as a public good. It asks local plans and developers to show how new places will be liveable, climate‑resilient and nature‑positive.
This policy shift matters because it changes the questions planning committees ask at pre‑application and decision stages. Instead of debating whether to include green space, the conversation becomes about what kind of green space, how it will be used, and how its benefits will be sustained over time.
BHL provides a practical toolkit for answering those questions. Its diagnostic questions and simple indicators translate design features into measurable health outcomes: proximity to green space, safe and attractive walking routes, opportunities for play and social interaction, and shade and seating for everyday comfort. Architects who can map BwN’s ecological standards onto BHL’s health metrics will be better placed to satisfy both ecological and public‑health expectations.
Design practice: three shifts
Firstly, design for multifunctionality from the outset. Rather than parceling biodiversity, drainage and amenity into separate compartments, integrate them. A swale can be a habitat corridor, a play edge and a flood‑attenuation feature. A pocket park can combine native planting for pollinators with seating and informal play. I believe that every square metre of green should earn its keep for nature and people. That principle reduces later trade‑offs and makes the case for GI in viability discussions.
Secondly, make health outcomes explicit and evidence‑based. Use BHL questions to create simple KPIs for planning submissions: percentage of homes within a five‑minute walk of high‑quality green space; number of shaded seating spots per 100 metres of a route; biodiversity score for retained and new habitats. These indicators are not academic exercises — they are the language planners and public‑health teams understand. Including them in design and health impact statements turns design intent into verifiable commitments.
Thirdly, secure long‑term management and governance. One of the recurring criticisms in national debate is that green assets are often short‑lived or poorly maintained. BwN accreditation and a clear, funded management plan address that risk. Accreditation signals that ecological and social benefits are designed to endure; a funded management mechanism (whether a management company, long‑term stewardship fund or covenant) makes that promise credible.
Practical recommendations for architects and planning consultants
Start by embedding BwN criteria in client briefs and mapping them to BHL questions so ecological quality and health outcomes are assessed together.
Use the draft guidance’s emphasis on nature recovery and climate resilience to frame design narratives in planning submissions.
Produce a short set of KPIs that planners and public‑health teams can easily review, and make long‑term management funding explicit in viability appraisals.
Engage public‑health teams and local communities early to co‑define what “accessible nature” means locally; that engagement often reveals simple design priorities that improve both use and maintenance.
To conclude
The convergence of Building with Nature, Building for a Healthy Life and the draft national design guidance offers us all a clear pathway: design green infrastructure that is ecologically robust, demonstrably health‑promoting and backed by credible long‑term management.
I believe that design that cares for nature and people is the only design that lasts. By translating ecological standards into health metrics and securing the governance to sustain them, architects can deliver places that are not only greener, but healthier and more resilient for the long term.
References:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-design-guidance-to-raise-the-bar-for-new-build-developments
https://www.designforhomes.org/project/building-for-a-healthy-life/
We were really impressed with Land Studio. They are creative, a delight to work with and captured our vision and their own vision perfectly.
Shahina Ahmad, Principal of Eden Girls’ School, Waltham Forest.