I think the writer is being a bit unrealistic. So long as you aren't somewhere at a rather high elevation to begin with, the temperature, elevation and wind ch

I think the writer is being a bit unrealistic. So long as you aren't somewhere at a rather high elevation to begin with, the temperature, elevation and wind chill factors seem like they'd be quite easy to work around. Even something as simple as buffering vegetation from the prevailing wind direction ought to go a long way. Perhaps a more relevant point might be that the architects aren't fully designing their vegetation's support systems, but that seems like it would require a higher burden of proof. I wouldn't be surprised if issues such as 'what if a large branch fell off 500 feet above street level?' aren't fully thought out, either. But I don't think there's any reason that someone using careful engineering and design couldn't put healthy plants on a tall building. If he was merely intending to point out that many architects are placing vegetation without proper design and engineering, he may be right, but I don't think he really succeeded in making the point.