About Hadspen Garden
The garden and landscape at Hadspen is the work of generations of serious gardeners.
Much remains of ambitious 17th, 18th and 19th century planting schemes, particularly in the parkland and the woodland associated with the house. Penelope Hobhouse, who lived at Hadspen until 1979, restored and enlarged the earlier garden and made her work there the subject of her first book, The Country Gardener. Recently she has returned to replant the Lower Garden and the parkland.
Since 1986 the Canadian gardeners, Sandra and Nori Pope, have continued this tradition, transforming the Upper Garden with entirely new planting schemes and a bold use of colour, incorporating the quarter of a mile of old brick walls. Hadspen has always been famous for new and rare plants - the hostas and hellebore collection was started by Eric Smith in the early 1970s - and the Popes have built on this by introducing both outstanding plants from abroad and many that they have cultivated themselves, among them Astrantia “Hadspen Blood” and Dicentra “Gold Heart”. In 1998 they published Colour by Design (Conran Octopus), a book about their theories on colour and planting, and the experience of gardening at Hadspen.
“The Popes have created one of the most exciting and loveliest gardens in Britain; not only a beautiful and peaceful garden to visit, but also a wonderful inspiration for any gardener who wants to learn about planting colour harmonies.” (Noel Kingsbury, Country Life, October 1995)
“Hadspen garden has been turned into an extraordinary promenade round a spectrum, a display of unfamiliar plants and an object lesson in cultivation and energy. We can all admire it, see the general picture and return home, having isolated particular plants and groupings which became a springboard for our own ideas.” (Robin Lane Fox, Financial Times, August 1998)
Hadspen Garden and Nursary current situation
1 GARDENS ‘An 18th-century walled kitchen garden with lively planting in colour themed borders.’ ( P.Taylor in Gardens of Britain)
Strengths
Hadspen is associated in the public mind with exceptional planting selections and associations. The Hadspen ‘brand’ is supported through positive associations with P.Hobhouse, E.Smith and the Popes. Plant cultivars with names which include ‘Hadspen’ provide free publicity and help to reinforce the ‘brand image’ of horticultural excellence.
The Gardens are stocked with an extensive range of perennials which are a valuable asset in their own right. ( An audit is desirable)
The Gardens are managed, stocked and insured through the joint nursery/garden operation. There are no direct costs to the owner at the current time.
Maintenance costs (excluding the Pope’s input) are approximately £9000 p.a.
The Gardens currently generate a gross income from admission charges of £30/35000 p.a.
Weaknesses
‘The one sorrow at Hadspen is that the garden visitor sees no connection with the house.’ (P.Taylor)
This opinion is reinforced by the Pope’s experience of a 10% drop in revenue since separate access to the Gardens was created. The standard of provision for teas and toilets is inadequate and does not meet current health and safety standards.
The Gardens have yet to address ‘Good Practice’ as outlined in policy documents relating to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The Gardens approach road and car park are uninspiring and of a poor standard.
Passing traffic is unlikely to be attracted into the Garden. The Gardens lack structure, having evolved in a piecemeal manner, the Popes in particular feeling unable to make any significant changes to the layout.
Opportunities
Foreign Office’s current commission will begin to address the issue of Garden structure starting with the ‘Walled D’. Their brief to ‘provide a platform on which successive plantsmen can perform’ will preserve the tradition of experimental horticulture at Hadspen. An inspiring new Garden design will provide an opportunity to raise public awareness of Hadspen, creating new customers and rejuvenating the ‘brand image’.
Garden revenue will increase as interest in the New Garden attracts new customers to Hadspen. The greater Estate offers the potential for linking a visit to the Gardens to country walks, exploring archaeology etc, extending the visitor experience.
The Popes withdrawal from active management marks another stage in the evolution of these Gardens. This could be seen as both an opportunity and a threat
Threats
The current design commission may not specifically address design issues relating to the Garden areas as a whole and their place within the Estate. Existing regular customers may be alienated if the Gardens character is radically altered without incorporating some of the ‘tradition’ of Hadspen under the Popes, P. Hobhouse etc.
New visitors may not be converted to regular customers because of perceived limited visitor experience and the lack of infrastructure. The link between nursery and garden may be severed if the new planting design is unrelated to nursery stock. This is a serious threat to both sides of the business as a significant proportion of repeat visitors will be motivated by plant purchasing.
Management of the Garden in the future could prove expensive and challenging if there is no direct link with the nursery, or, indeed, no nursery at all. Imposing a competition based planting scheme on a Gardens manager could prove unsustainable in the long run.
2 THE NURSERY
‘A nursery with good plants is still maintained, some of them cultivars bearing the Hadspen name.’ (P.Taylor 2003)
Strengths
It is a profitable business with plant sales grossing £60/65000 per annum.
It has an established name stretching beyond its current customer base.
Production costs are low due to a low tech infrastructure, and the large proportion of plants propagated on site from ’stock plants’ in the Garden.
Approximately £12000 is spent annually on buying in tissue culture plants, plugs, liners for growing on. This is a low percentage for a retail outlet, reflecting the Nurseries reputation for propagating good and relatively unusual plant selections.
Labour costs are also ‘artificially’ low as, for the Popes, the nursery is essentially a lifestyle choice’. PAYE labour costs for the nursery have been estimated at around £7000 p.a. The nursery benefits from association with plant selections which bear the Hadspen name.
Although the revenue from plant royalties is not included in the gross revenue for the nursery, customers seek out new introductions and are attracted to Hadspen for this reason.
Customers are attracted by the ‘Potting Shed’ image i.e. the antithesis of garden Centre blandness.
Weaknesses
The nursery propagation area is not equipped up for the efficient production of plants. It is unlikely that any future manager would wish to operate with these facilities. The propagation area will not provide a suitable background for the New Garden and will need to be relocated. The nursery is dependent on the Garden borders for stock plants/propagation material.
The nursery is dependent on a link between planting style in the Garden and plants retailing in the nursery. Customers are limited to those who can visit the nursery in person.
Although Hadspen has a national/international reputation the nursery in its present form cannot capitalise on this. The nostalgic image does not appeal to all sectors of the public.
3 OPPORTUNITIES
The propagation area needs to be moved and developed. This is an opportunity for a radical rethink. e.g. physically separating the sales and propagation areas. The potential customer base could be greatly expanded to include sales through the internet and mail order.
The public are already aware of the name but only a small proportion can visit in person. The market for plant sales is evolving as people’s lifestyles change.
‘Time poor, cash rich working couples ‘are replacing ‘ladies who lunch’ certainly in terms of retail spending. The new Garden is likely to attract this type of customer and the nursery could benefit greatly if it is ‘repositioned’ to meet their needs.
The Hadspen name could be used to sell an appropriate range of compatible products. Suggestions have included Estate produce and gardening tools. This would particularly suit mail order (It would be interesting to know the breakdown of Sarah Raven’s sales for instance) Acknowledging the importance of new plant introductions the nursery could refocus on breeding/ selecting plants to maintain public awareness and interest in the nursery.
A propagator such a Nori could work in partnership with the nursery to achieve this objective.
Threats
The proposed ‘planting stage’ within the Garden may be inadequate as a shop window for the nursery. The nurseries image and certainly its layout is incompatible with the cutting edge design underway in the Gardens.
The horticultural market is already accommodating the need for accessibility by moving towards mail order(internet) and away from retail nurseries. The range of plant material being sold in this way is constantly expanding.
You no longer need to go to a nursery like Hadspen to get an unusual plant. The nursery needs to grow and become more efficient to fund investment in infrastructure.
Providing a successor for the Popes will be challenging. The profile for this position requires careful consideration. To survive in changing times a more business orientated approach is probably required, with perhaps other employees providing the plantsman attributes.
4 THE FUTURE
To be considered;
OPTION (1)Retaining a retail nursery (production and sales adjacent to Gardens)
OPTION (2) Retaining a sales area adjacent to Garden & moving Production off-site
OPTION (3) Gardens to stand alone without nursery.
OPTION (1) The principal merit of this approach is that it is the path of least resistance/no change:
i) Minimum input is required from the Estate Office
ii) The Popes are able to sell their nursery as an ongoing business
iii) Garden ticket sales and maintenance are easily facilitated
iv) The nursery provides desirable added value to a repeat Garden visits.
v) The business can be managed by a plantsperson who combines gardening with propagation.
vi) A gross income of £100,000, net £70,000 based on the present expenditure/ staffing levels is achievable. We have already agreed however that change is necessary, and indeed desirable for the following reasons;
i) Propagation facilities must be moved as part of the Garden Redesign
ii) Investment is required to upgrade the infrastructure
iii) It can no longer be assumed that the Gardens will provide propagation material/stock plants for the nursery.
iv) The site is restricted in terms of area and shade. Production and sales will always be limited by these factors.
v) The market and customer profile is changing, Hadspen will need to adapt to survive, particularly with the loss of the Pope’s high profile. Summary Taking all these factors into consideration, the best fit strategy to follow, if Option One is adopted, would be to concentrate on developing an effective sales area with reduced propagation facilities. This strategy would require a substantial increase in the buying in of wholesale plants at all stages of growth.
Sourcing appropriate plant material, or having plants grown to contract would be an important task for the next nursery manager. It would be essential to maintain the range and quality of plants if the Hadspen’s existing reputation is to be sustained.
5 CONCENTRATING RESOURCES
on an upgraded reception area/building would be of benefit to both the gardens and nursery. It would need to retain some of the charm and individuality of the current ‘potting shed’, to avoid the garden centre image, yet perhaps be more contemporary in style to reflect the new landscape beyond.
Improvements to the plant sales area and reception would generate increased sales at the nursery. The principal limit to growth would be the lack of capacity to produce/package plants for internet or mail orders.
OPTION (2) Taking the main propagation facilities off-site is a bolder, but not necessarily more complex choice.
This option would only be realistic if a suitable site was available on the Estate. Duchy Nurseries in Cornwall follows this model very successfully, as people assume they are buying plants from the Estate, even though no production is visible in the retail nursery. Renaming the nursery ‘Hadspen Estate Nursery’ would perhaps be beneficial to the sale of Estate produce?
The principal arguments supporting this option are as follows;
i) It would allow the business to grow beyond current site restrictions
ii) A wider market could be targeted using internet and mail order sales as the nursery would have the space and capacity to achieve this. The nursery could then fully capitalise on the Hadspen brand
iii) Investment in propagation facilities could be lower as the appearance of structures would not be so critical.
iv) Obtaining planning permission would probably be more straightforward away from the historic heart of the Estate.
v) Existing stock plants in the Gardens could be transferred to open Ground facilities ahead of landscape construction work programmed for the winter of 2006
vi) Redevelopment at the old nursery site could focus on a visitor reception facilities and plant sales. There is no reason why a potting area could not be included to retain the atmosphere of a working nursery (and allow flexible working arrangements). This model works well at other comparable nurseries.
vii) There would be continuity of trading and a business to value and sell This option is, however, not without challenges and pitfalls, some of which are summarised below.
i) Split site working arrangements are more complicated logistically.
ii) Plant handling strategies would need to be devised and resourced.
iii) Garden maintenance could suffer as the focus of attention shifts elsewhere iv) A large commercial operation would require careful management, skilled marketing etc.
6 SUMMARY
Option (2) would be the most demanding in the short term but should produce a more sustainable nursery enterprise in the long-term. It avoids cluttering the inner Estate with structures for propagation.
The focus can then be centred on visitor access to both the Gardens and wider Estate .
An attractive plant sales area combined with better toilets and refreshment facilities is more important to visitors than the sight of polytunnels. Much of the success of the current nursery is due to the character and craftsmanship of Sandra and Nori Pope and their direct link with the Garden. This unique selling point cannot be reproduced as the gardens evolve and other horticulturalists, not connected with the nursery, have an input.
Option (2) may seem a dramatic departure from the current arrangement, lacking the personal touch the Popes provide. However, Niall Hobhouse has already indicated that something ‘exceptional’ is, once again, about to taking place in the Garden; why not in the nursery as well?
OPTION (3) As we await the new design for the ‘Walled D’ it is difficult to make firm judgements on the future relationship between Garden and Nursery.
Option (3) however, asks us to consider the future of the Gardens on their own. The following factors would be critical to the future of public access to the Gardens
i) We know that a Foreign Office design, furnished with competition winning planting, will draw in visitors to the Gardens. We can assume that visitor numbers will peak in the first few years and then plateau or decline depending on the quality of the ‘visitor experience’.
ii) A high quality visitor experience is as dependent on mundane facilities as it is on good design. Without the nursery, the capital costs of improving the infrastructure would need to be met from Garden entrance receipts. It would , therefore, be useful to know the proposed visitor capacity of the new landscape design.
iii) A Gardens manager would need to be appointed together with part-time gardeners and the use of contract labour. A plantsman would not necessarily be an asset, as he or she will not be expected to carry out any major design work.
iv) Maintenance costs, ticket sales,insurance etc would also need to be covered by Garden admissions.
v) Management of the Gardens and staff would be an additional area of responsibility for the Estate office.
7 SUMMARY
N.Hobhouse has indicated that he will not keep the garden open just because it is open now. Looking at the cost to the Estate in terms of management time and capital investment it would seem reasonable to suggest that opening the Gardens on their own would be unsustainable.
Perhaps the best strategy to take if Option (3) is adopted is to view the Gardens as a private landscape with occasional public access. This would certainly reduce the visiting public’s expectations of teas and toilets.
8 CONCLUSION
Hadspen is to be graced with a landmark garden that will provide a platform on which the evolution of planting style can continue to be explored. Maintaining a successful nursery adjacent to this garden will depend on a strong inter-relationship between the two; i.e. the nursery must be good enough to support the cutting edge design on display in the walled garden. If the nursery evolves to reflect the new garden, both enterprises will benefit.
The current nursery is already an established and successful business. The key to building on this stable foundation is to make the essential investment in infrastructure. Visitors should approach the garden through a reception that has at least the basic amenities and, ideally, continues to reflect some of the unique character of the garden beyond. A key decision in the redevelopment of the nursery is whether all the propagation should take place on site, or whether some or all of the production should be relocated elsewhere on the Estate.
At the very least, some open ground facilities for stock plants will be essential when the Walled D is cleared for construction works. Moving production would allow the current site to be transformed into an effective plant sales area, together with a reception area for visits to the garden and wider Estate. It would also provide a potential opportunity for production to expand and capitalise on wider markets than those currently targeted.