The amount that is reasonable would depend on the scope of the work. That can be anything from a conceptual drawing showing layout of hardscapes, plantings, proposed ege of clearing and such, to a real plan that has all of the information to build it and to get it permitted.

That is not an easy project to design past the conceptual layout plan. It should have a topographic survey done so that it can be properly designed. You need someone who knows the wetland regulations in that area which may include having to have a specialst delineateand flag the edge of it (the surveyor may have to locate the flagging).

The biggest physical issue on that site is topography. If your designer does not really know how to deal with drainage, erosion, and retaining walls (whether you need them or not) the plan will be of little value. If you are planning on having any refined planting, beds of good soil will need to be created.

Most of the design work is site design related rather than garden design. A garden designer won't be able to build the cake to put the frosting on. So, you either have to be happy with the cake that you have and get it frosted, or you need someone to bake the cake.

I don't think that you could get that cake recipe for under $5,000. You might be able to get a frosting recipe for $500.

I like woodland gardens and wooded sites always appeal to me - but, WOW! that one is beyond what I'd ever want to deal with. I think laag is definitely right - you need serious site design, not just the easy, pretty stuff. I have no idea of costs but I'd think $5,000 might be an underestimate!

I agree with the above and I'd say closer to $15,000 just to get someone out and you probably wouldn't complete it in your lifetime. You should scale down your sights.

Here is a link that might be useful: Propagating Perennials

Well those are some depressing responses! I wasn't expecting to get help for $500, but $15K is definitely out of reach.

By scale down my sights, what do you mean? Like I said, I wasn't planning to DO that much. It's just a big property. I wasn't thinking of pools or water features (we already have those anyway) or any of the other big things you usually think of. So what would I "scale" down???

You wouldn't get them to drive out for anything less. When you think of L.A.'s think of doctors, lawyers and what they charge. The lawyers I work with charge $200 and up per hour. Most people don't think of them in that vein which is foolish, because they think what they do is easy, they have no clue what it takes to make the final picture. They just think of the designer who comes walks around then goes out to the truck and wallah comes back with a design. You could get someone from a nursery to give you a sketch or two but nothing technical like topos or steps, etc. Most designers aren't up on construction, they just draw designs and make suggestions that may or may not be accurate given your dimensions. Let your fingers do the walking and check things out, but don't be shocked. Scale back or don't be so grand, it's the little things that count.

Here is a link that might be useful: Propagating Perennials

I don't think you need to spend 15k. It all depends first on how regulated waterways and wetlands are in your area.

NJ is a pretty liberal state with a lot of urban and suburban areas which tend to drive a lot more state wide regulations rather than states with a greater percentage of the voting population living in rural areas. Those regulations along with their permitting process is going to drive a lot of the price of professional design services.

I would suggest that you sart with a conceptual layout plan that will address what you want to do and where you want various things to take place. That would not limit anyone from doing it based on licensing.

Then you could contact the conservation commission or whoever regulates the resource areas that are on your site to fnd out what needs to be permitted and what it will take to do so. The agents of the regulatory body should also give you insight to what would be easily permitted and what would be more difficult. That would reduce design time with engineers should you need them because they will have something to work from.

I think it is generally good to work from general to specific and from big picture to details. However, I'm not generally a big fan of conceptual plans for residential work. This might be a case where that is really a good idea for the reasons above.

Thanks, laag -- I'm in Pennsylvania, not Jersey, and around here, the idea of permitting and conservation in general is kind of an afterthought here ...

Your idea sounds like it might be the way to go. I could always have the conceptual plan, then contract for specific plans as time and budget allow.

I'm wondering why you're generally not a fan of conceptual plans for residential work? Is it because usually the scope is so small?

Thanks for your input!

I a not a fan of conceptual plans for residential because a good discussion and site analysis will usually result in a clear direction to go in. Then the conceptual plan (or plans) is an unnecessary excercise which can be bypassed to invest the design time ($) diectly into the landscape plan. Why pretend that there are three directions to go in when you clearly know which is the one to follow?

The kind of conceptual plan that I think is good for this project is one that would show a layout and planting ideas without knowing how pratical the permitting or the construction will really be. In other words, it may show a patio that might be very hard to permit or build without worrying too much about the detail of how it would be built. That could be done later by a designer with a wider skill set.

laag - when I looked at the pictures the OP linked, I was concerned about things like soil stability, drainage and the source of all those rocks (where are they coming from? how close to the surface is the bedrock? What kind of rock is it? etc.) I was thinking I'd want to know that sort of stuff before I started thinking about what would go where, because knowing the literal underlying details might make me plan to put things like patios and lawns (if a lawn is even possible!) somewhere different than I might initially think. That's why I thought your $5K estimate might be low. But it sounds like the starting plan that you mean is to assume that all the terrain issues will be dealt with later...? Is the approach I would take too conservative?

Woodyoak -- we live on top of glacial till. Literally. I think it was called the Wisconsin Glacier in the last Ice Age.

We grow rocks. We practice what we call Extreme Gardening. We dig holes with a pickax in order to pop a daffodil bulb into the ground. Usually there isn't much dirt; the trees appear to cling to life by setting their roots in leaf mold that builds up between the rocks. We usually have to add dirt to whatever hole we dig, because when we dig the hole, it's a matter of removing rocks, which, of course, leaves a hole but no dirt.

Down on "the flat" -- the vast majority of our acreage, which is flat along the creek (and is in a 100-year flood plain) -- there is substantial good soil, thanks to sediment from floods and flow down the hill.

But on the hill itself, which is where our house is nestled, about 100 feet above "the flat" -- it's all rocks tumbled together for several feet below the surface. I have no idea why we haven't slid into the creek, but we built 10 years ago and the house hasn't settled unexpectedly or anything, and we've had THREE 100-year floods in recent years. It's a good solid glacier .

In several places, we have dug down far enough to expose a mostly clay soil underneath the rock/leaf mold. It's not so great either. I figure any substantial beds from hereon out will have to be raised. We do tuck plants that are suited to our area into the unadulterated ground, and they do OK. It's the deer that kill us, not the rocky soil.

Drainage-wise, because of the rocky substrate, we have no issues along the slope, and the wetlands areas on "the flat" are the natural places that the water runs to (and that I would like to accent, not "deal with.")

But I understand your concerns. Not being from around here, it must look like the pit of hell, from the standpoint of landscape design. I say that with cheer and optimism! If I can garden here, I can freakin' garden ANYWHERE!!!

And when we have parties like this, it makes it all worthwhile:
{{gwi:33388}}

That's a gorgeous site. If I were local, I'd be tempted just to have an excuse to hang out in the woods.

IF I were local, here's how I'd propose we attack the project: we'd spend a fair bit of time on the initial consultation walking the property. You've lived there for ten years- even if you don't explicitly say "this area is special," it'll show. If you have a property survey/engineered drawing with the house properly located on it, I'd get a copy from you. If you don't, I'd strongly recommend you get one done. I've found that in rural areas, you can sometimes get a decent topo survey done fairly reasonably.

Then, I would do a concept drawing like what laag described. At this point, it would be all about defining spaces by function and location. We'd then discuss your priorities, based on the master concept plan. The location of a proposed gathering spot may necessitate changes in drainage patterns, or bringing in fill, or any number of scenarios (just as an example). While we wouldn't be designing the solutions at this time, at least knowing what's involved would help you prioritize, and eventually budget.

Me personally, I'd do a project like this on a straight hourly basis. In fact, I'm doing one very similar in RI that way, and it's working out really well.

I think the critical thing here is going to be finding the right design professional. The true scope of work is really not going to be apparent to anyone until they walk the site with you; if they're good, they should be able to ascertain that right away and give you a reasonable ballpark. The best advice? Keep interviewing until you find someone with a good portfolio who is excited about your project. You're clearly in love with your property; don't put it in the hands of someone who's just filling the schedule.

Dave

"If I were local, I'd be tempted just to have an excuse to hang out in the woods"

Hey, Dave, that's a great idea! You wanna come camp for a week and do a design? We have a stellar camping party in August every year that starts Friday night and involves serious grilling and barbecuing on our smoker as well as swimming and camping and goes until Sunday night.

And heck, Rhode Island isn't that far. People come from Vermont and Massachusetts.

(And I commute 90 minutes each way to work, so distance isn't a big deal to me to start with :)

We have the original site survey from when we built. And I think we also have a topo overlay -- not sure of its provenance, but we have something like what you're talking about.

Anyway, I think you're right that the right person is gonna be the most important factor. I've been cruising the local landscape design/architect Web sites, and they're all pretty standard suburban setups, lots of pretty, acre-lot-size transformations with cute water follies or brick pavers to a pool or whatever, but not too much of what I need. I do need the grand plan (where exactly should I situate that Stonehenge circle anyway?) before I can even think about whether bluestone or flagstone would be the right choice!

Thanks again for all the advice.

Way to make it tempting- but seriously, how much work could one get done around such a shindig? And I'm in VA, I just happen to have a few clients in southern New England.

Just a thought on the portfolio stuff you mentioned- don't automatically rule out designers for having mostly suburban-type stuff in their photo galleries. That's what the bulk of work is for most of us. We're going to show that in our portfolios a) because that's what we have a lot of, and b) because that will help us get the next job that's likely to come along. I really, really think your job's success will be based on fit. Obviously, if you hate what you see in the portfolio you can pass on by, but I would just start calling and talking to people. Instead of looking for projects similar to yours, maybe take a second look at portfolios to see how well they create spaces; if they seem skilled in using the types of materials that you like; and if you look at the photos and think "you know, not at myhouse, but I would be happy to have a (whatever) like that!"

A portfolio's only part of it- don't let it limit you. For example, I don't have an ultra-modern landscape in my portfolio yet, because I have yet to get together with such a client. Its absence from my portfolio doesn't mean I wouldn't give it my all and create a great landscape.

Just something else to think about.