Landscape architects: is Kervalt a fit?

1 / 10

Reconstructing what was decided years ago, by whom and on which soil data, takes days of searching.

Liability in landscape work arrives five to fifteen years late.

What we are gauging: Reconstructability: whether a decision from years ago can be reassembled with sources, because liability in landscape work arrives late and asks for evidence.

2 / 10

The ecological reasoning behind certain choices lives with the people who made them.

One departure takes the ecological rationale of every living project.

What we are gauging: Whether ecological reasoning is institutionalised or oral. Knowledge in heads retires before the plantings it explains.

3 / 10

Every public tender asks again for the same references and certificates to be assembled by hand.

A week of copying that nobody bills for.

What we are gauging: The unbillable assembly cost per tender. Repeated hand-assembly is time the client does not pay for and the firm does not get back.

4 / 10

The version of the rules a design relied on requires manual reconstruction when rules change.

You must cite the rule as it stood, not as it is remembered.

What we are gauging: Version traceability: whether you can show which version of the rules a design relied on when they change mid-project.

5 / 10

Our own realised evidence, which plantings survived the drought, cannot be queried today as a design argument.

Twenty years of projects should be a design argument no competitor can copy.

What we are gauging: Whether realised evidence, your own survived plantings, is retrievable as a design argument, or lost in old files.

6 / 10

Decisive site evidence sits in personal chats instead of the project dossier.

Evidence in a chat is evidence you cannot produce.

What we are gauging: Evidence discipline: whether decisive site proof is captured in the dossier or scattered across personal chats.

7 / 10

Proving that projects never touch each other in shared tools is not possible today.

Provable isolation, in SQL, is the answer a DPO wants.

What we are gauging: Whether project isolation is provable. Clients and DPOs increasingly ask for proof that one project never touched another.

8 / 10

The location and access of site and boundary data cannot be fully demonstrated today.

Site surveys and boundary data deserve a precise answer.

What we are gauging: Whether site and boundary data location is known and stateable: a procurement question now, a contract condition soon.

9 / 10

Retention duties require the dossier to outlive the project by decades; that guarantee cannot be given today.

Your trees must survive thirty years; your records must survive longer.

What we are gauging: Retention capability: whether the dossier can outlive the project by the decades the law requires.

10 / 10

When a contractor replaces specimens, the position rests on notes made on site.

Timestamped evidence beats memory in a dispute.

What we are gauging: Evidence-capture discipline: whether substitutions and deviations are recorded in a controlled way before they become disputes.