Garden Designer vs. Landscape Architect qualifications

Hi, everyone! I was just wondering if anyone could clear something up for me.

A landscape architect, as I understand the title, is someone who has earned a college degree in landscape architecture. These folks have completed a full college education in landscaping.

A "garden designer" on the other hand... what qualifications are necessary to earn this title?? Are there any regulations governing who may or may not refer to themselves as a "garden designer"? Is any formal education needed at all, or can experience alone qualify someone?

Likewise, terms like gardening architect or garden consultant or landscape consultant are also pretty ambiguous. Any insights into how to differentiate these titles and the level of expertise associated with them???

Thanks!
Hugs :)

I think it's all in how much you have to pay them. :) Jessamine

Hi:

Your right about the landscape architect (LA)..4 year degree. LA's can stamp or seal plans and LD's cannot. Designers will have their plans sent to a LA or engineer for the seal. Landscape designers have a degree also. When I got my landscape design degree from Temple University, it was a 2 year program. All our classes were intense and focused only in our major with electives from the landscape design or horticulture programs. In the Temple 2 year landscape design (LD)program there were no core classes as there are in the LA program. Temple has now changed the LD program to a 4 year degree. I am not sure what courses are required now.

A LD is someone specifically trained in landscape design who earns their living from designing. I have met many people who call themselves LD or LA and do not have the education required for these titles. Make some calls and ask to see examples of their work or visit their website. This will help weed out the imposters.

Right before I finished my LD program a few instructors convinced me to transfer into the LA program because they thought I had talent that would be better served by the LA degree. Big mistake on my part. I hated the LA program and dropped it after 2 semesters. These were the major differences I found between the two programs:

Landscape Design Program

Heavy emphasis on designing residental spaces
More plant classes and stronger focus on plant selection and cultural conditions
Primary focus was desiging functional outdoor spaces to suit the needs of the customer

Landscape Architect Program

Project focus was large scale commercial, industrial or recreational designs
Program covered a much broader range of topics in less detail
Land planning, streetscapes, utilities & SWM were major topics

I loved the LD program. I couldn't wait to get to the design studio and was shocked when the 4 hour studio class seemed to end so quickly. Once I was in the LA program I hated every minute I spent in the studio. I quickly realized that I didn't want to spend my time designing McDonalds parking lots or developing a master plan for a new housing development. I hope I don't offend anyone with my comments. This is simply my opinion and experience. You can walk into a design studio and tell if the people are LA or LD studens, they are as different as night and day. I felt like a fish out of water in the LA program.

The most common complaints I hear about both groups from customers:

LA - Customers did not feel their LA had a good understanding of what they wanted the space to be like; plants recommended by LA were not available from local contractors or plant nurseries; beautiful designs but completely out of scale with the customer's budget; plant recommendations were only trees and shrubs (no perennials, annuals, bulbs or ground covers)

LD - Designer did not resolve SWM or regrading issues; no construction details provided for masonry or carpentry projects; some designers are not associated with contractors and left the customer on their own to find a contractor to install the project; designs were too maintenance intensive for customers to care for on their own

I hope I didn't come across as too flippant. The sad truth is that many people do claim the titles but not everyone can back up the claim. In the event the titles are genuine then the money factor is the simple truth because the corporations will pay the heavy fees for someone who supposedly can do the work properly and keep the zoning commission off their backs and will deal with all the necessary subcontractors. They also develop parks. Most private homeowners neither need or want that kind of expertese and couldn't afford it if they did.
A landscape designer can give you guidelines and help you develop the bones of your garden or yard. In some cases they will be connected with a good nursery and the nursery pays their wages which are recouped when you contract for them to do a major landscaping job. Often the plans are done for free, no landscaping is purchased and the customer walks away with the plan anyway. Bad Karma to them. The best solution seems to be a landscaping nursery owner who has training as a designer and is a licensed contractor and owns or can lease the equipment to do major jobs as well as the little ones which are going to be loss leaders but will bring the average homeowner back season after season for the plants that keep him in business between the big jobs. Jessamine

In the best interest of the homeowner, it is better for them to pay for a landscape design and own it outright. Most smart or education consumers understand this concept. You get what you pay for. If a contractor gives you a deisng for no charge it is because 1) they are desperate for work and willing to take a loss on the design in hopes of getting a project; 2) they have no design training or education and therefore don't spend the needed time on the project; 3) they have a bad reputation and therefore must offer free designs to entice new customers as they get little or no work from word of mouth. I worked as a designer for a nursery and believe me there is no such thing as a free design. Most nurseries simply add the cost of the design into the construction end of the project. Better quality nurseries charge a minimal design fee to customers and hope to make the rest up on plant material. Another thing to keep in mind is that both contractors and nurseries sell you plants that they have on hand and want to get rid of. This is especially true of nurseries. They need to move the plant material that is in bad condition or simply been in the nursery too long. Obviously, this plant material is easier used on a project as customers who come into the nursery would not select it.

When customers work directly with an LA or LD, they are getting a functional design that suits their personal style with plants they will enjoy. Plant nurseries who install projects are notorious for substituting plant material on the plan for anything they have in stock. Buyer beware!!! The best thing for customers to do is pay for, and own, a landscape design from a repuptable designer or landscape architect. Then put the project out for competitive bids from landscape contractors or nurseries in their area. Make sure you give instructions that all substitutions need to be approved in advance. This is the only way to truly get competitive bids.

A good LD will help customers with this process or simply help them choose a suitable contractor in their area.

Thank you for the information. I'll keep it in mind for the future. You covered ideas I hadn't even thought of. Dotti

Whoever you eventually choose, make sure you select someone who has shown they can do the style and type of design you want. It's hard to eliminate the 'oh, I LOVE that look!' factor but you as the customer/homeowner/gardener, need to be realistic about whether the style matches your skills and time as a gardener. I'm sure there's nothing more frustrating for any professional, licensed or not, to create a design and see it implemented, only to go by three or four years later and it's all fallen apart because it wasn't maintained.

We didn't have enough money to hire anyone licensed, but I did a lot of research on my own and then paid a Landscape Designer for two hours of her time to consult with me. She and I did not hit it off personally, but she listened to me, checked over my plant lists, and walked around the property with me. She approved most of what I'd selected and offered a couple of ideas I hadn't thought of. Then I interviewed the plain 'ole 'gardeners' who advertise in local papers, and found a wonderful guy who loves to garden and has the essential pick-up truck which we lack. He helped us do the 'bones' of the garden in the first install phase, and I use him for all our special projects as we continued on the three-year landscaping plan I had developed. He gives me advice when I need it, handles the hardscape installs we design, buys plants when I ask him to (altho 98% of them I buy myself), and moves any big plants that are too much for me to handle by myself.

I think we could have gotten a better overall design if we had used a professional designer, though. I would definitely have expected to pay for it, too. Free advice is usually worth exactly what it costs, lol. Just for fun I helped a family friend do some changes in his front yard, and although I love gardening, it was kind of a pain to deal with other people's restrictions: "No, I don't like garden sculptures", "But I want those black bearded iris in THIS spot (where they died)", "I only want plants that will get this big and no bigger", etc. My friend isn't a gardener, and it was a challenge to find plants that would visually work but stay within the limited care guidelines he was willing to give.

jkom...love your observations on people's restrictions!!! That is sooooooo true!!! I also love the customers who want full sun plants in a deep shade situation. You can advise some customers, but not all will take your advice. Luckily, most people willing to pay for design services will listen to a professional designer or architect. It's all the people who are looking for "free design suggestions" who won't take advice.