How Developers Choose a Landscape Partner

A landscape package fails or succeeds on three things most bid tables ignore: a BOQ specific enough to compare fairly, a maintenance SLA that survives the plants past handover, and a plant-supply plan that won’t collapse your schedule. Award on the lowest number without checking these three and you inherit substitutions, dead plants after month three, and mobilization delays. This guide shows what “good” looks like on each.

Delivered at scale — a completed corporate landscape package, Batangas

What should a landscape BOQ actually contain?

A Bill of Quantities you can compare fairly across bidders should specify — not leave to interpretation — the following. If a bidder’s BOQ is vaguer than this, you can’t compare apples to apples, and the gaps become variation orders later.

• Plant schedule with sizes and specs: species, quantity, and — critically — size/maturity (height, caliper, spread). “100 trees” means nothing; “100 × Champaca, 3.0 m ht, 3–4 cm caliper” is comparable and priceable.
• An establishment / wastage allowance, stated: living material has attrition. A credible BOQ discloses an allowance (commonly ~20%) rather than hiding it — or pricing too thin and substituting later.
• Softscape vs hardscape split: planting, soil and irrigation separated from walkways, walls and features, each with its own quantities and rates.
• Soil and drainage, not just plants: planting medium volume, drainage layers and subdrains are where cheap bids quietly cut — and where plants later die.
• Irrigation as a line, not an afterthought: if there’s no irrigation scope, ask how the planting survives the dry season.
• Mobilization, delivery and maintenance as named lines: so you can phase, compare, and hold them accountable.

Why the size spec matters most: two bids can look ₱2M apart purely because one quoted mature specimens and the other quoted whips that take three years to read as “landscaped.” Always normalise the plant sizes before you compare totals.

What should a landscape maintenance SLA cover?

Installation is the easy part; keeping a landscape alive is where value is won or lost. A maintenance SLA worth signing should define:

• Response time to defects: e.g. a 72-hour corrective-response standard for dead/damaged material or irrigation faults — with a number, not “reasonable efforts.”
• A plant replacement warranty: e.g. 6 months — and who bears replacement cost, and what voids it (owner neglect, infrastructure failure).
• Scope and frequency: mowing, pruning, fertilising, pest control, irrigation checks — how often, and what’s included vs. billed as consumed.
• Carve-outs, honestly stated: loss caused by construction, flooding or infrastructure isn’t the landscaper’s fault — a fair SLA excludes it explicitly rather than arguing later.
• Reporting: a monthly report with photos and a KPI scorecard so facilities teams have an audit trail.

The trap to avoid: many contracts fund installation but starve maintenance — so a beautiful landscape browns out by month four. Budget maintenance as a line from day one, and tie a portion of retention to plant survival, not just to installation sign-off.

How do you de-risk plant supply? (the hidden schedule-killer)

Here’s the risk nobody puts on the bid table: most contractors buy plants on the open market after award. That’s exactly where timelines slip — the specified species isn’t available at size, prices have moved, and substitutions arrive. On a large planting package, supply is a bigger schedule risk than labour.

Questions that expose supply risk before you award:

1. “Where does the plant material come from — your own nursery, or the open market after award?”
2. “Is stock reserved on signing, or sourced when we mobilize?”
3. “What’s your mobilization time from Notice to Proceed?” (Own-grown stock enables ~1 week; market-sourced can mean weeks of chasing.)
4. “If the specified size isn’t available, what’s the substitution policy — and who signs off?”

What good looks like: a vertically integrated contractor grows its own stock, reserves it on signing, and mobilizes within a week — because the plants are already in the ground on their farm. That single fact removes the largest source of landscape-package delay. It’s the model MEG is built on: a 32-hectare nursery behind every install.

The supply base behind the mobilization claim — MEG's own 32-hectare nursery

What are the red flags when comparing landscape bids?

• A total that’s far below the pack — usually thin soil/drainage, no allowance, or market-sourced substitution risk.
• A plant schedule with quantities but no sizes.
• No maintenance line, or maintenance quoted as a token amount.
• No warranty, or a warranty with no named duration.
• Vague mobilization (“to be advised”) with no supply-source answer.
• No landscape architect or credentialed lead on the team — though the credential alone is only half the check: see why the best landscape designs come from teams that also maintain them.

A pre-award checklist

Before you award, confirm…	OK?
Plant sizes/specs normalised across all bids	☐
Establishment/wastage allowance disclosed	☐
Soil, drainage and irrigation are real line items	☐
Maintenance SLA with named response time + warranty	☐
Plant-supply source and mobilization time confirmed	☐
Substitution policy and sign-off defined	☐
Credentialed lead / landscape architect on the team	☐
Design team has a maintenance feedback loop (why it matters)	☐

For budget framing before you bid out the package, see how much landscaping costs in the Philippines or run your site through the budget calculator. For why the design team’s field experience matters as much as its credentials, read why the best landscape designs come from teams that also maintain them. If you’re scoping or awarding a landscape package, we’re glad to review your BOQ or walk your site — get in touch.