Assessment Criteria for Professional Landscape Designer Membership
AILDM is committed to providing the highest level of service to all sectors of our membership. Our priority is to assist and promote our members and encourage professionalism and exemplary and ethical work practices.
Being a member is highly valued as a real point of difference when consumers are seeking quality and reliability.
Applicants must prove their eligibility to become a member of the association. Each application is treated on a case by case basis depending on the mix of qualifications, experience, and level of expertise. The past record, and any conduct issues, of any applicant seeking to re-join AILDM after a period of lapsed membership will be taken into consideration.
As part of ensuring we maintain the professionalism of the association as a whole, there is a careful selection process for applicants. Applications are reviewed by AILDM's Membership Committee and National Council.
Once membership is granted Members are to uphold our Code of Ethics and use of Logo Rules.
To qualify for Professional Landscape Designer membership evidence of a qualification equal to or above Diploma (AQF 5) is required. If a formal qualification is not held a minimum of 10 years experience in the landscape industry is required.
Applicants wishing to promote services of Arboriculture or Landscape Architecture must provide evidence of specific relevant industry recognised qualifications.
All applicants are required to submit a portfolio in which they confirm that they are the sole author of the designs and any other documentation submitted as part of the portfolio. The portfolio shall include the designer's best examples of their work.
Applicants are to submit documentation relating to a minimum of 3 projects which demonstrate the full range of work they carried out for each project. The combined set of documents are to show the full range of work undertaken by the applicant. Further documents can be provided.
Portfolios of a high standard are expected. They will be reviewed for attention to detail, adherence to accepted drawing conventions, graphic presentation, appropriate use of plants, site grading and structures.
Documentation packages to demonstrate the following may be submitted:
A.For Designers - A Complete Design Package demonstrating competence in:
Consideration and Resolution of Levels
The documents submitted to demonstrate the Design Intent may include a range of the following:
Planting Plan (including Planting Schedule and Planting Notes).
Grading Plan and/ or Sections
B. For Landscape Managers - A range of Plans of Management demonstrating competence in :
Site Analysis / Mapping / Data collection
Existing Tree / Plant / Vegetation Community identification
Vegetation / Landscape Management Principles
Analysis of site issues relating to managing the landscape
Clear recommendations with measurable outcomes
The documents submitted to demonstrate competence in one or more of the following fields:
Amenity / Recreational / Institutional Landscapes
Environmental / Natural Area / Riparian Landscapes
C. For Senior Entry (without a formal qualification) - A range of plans demonstrating competence
Minimum 10years experience in the design industry
If requested by membership committee, produce documentation/designs to support skill level
If LDI membership was previously held or applied for, an explanation for the lapse in membership or additional skills obtained since their previous application.
Landscape designs submitted will be assessed on the following criteria:
Is the documentation clear, legible and easy to understand?
Is the overall documentation presentation (labelling, keys, legends) of a professional standard appropriate to industry level?
Does the planting plan show all plants at an appropriate size (generally 90-100% of their mature size for the understorey and 75-100% for trees) with plants labelled and quantities shown?
Is there a clear and logical symbology for displaying plant locations and quantities, and does the plant schedule also clearly reflect that symbology or plant code, plus mature size and pot sizes?
Does each plan specify the scale and include a scale bar/scale and north point?
Is there differentiation between existing and proposed trees?
2. Design and Spatial Layout
Do the levels clearly relate to the variety of design and construction elements?
Does the design incorporate design elements such as enclosure, scale, mass and void, light and shade?
Have plants been chosen, spaced and combined intelligently with reference to the location, design intent and mature size?
Have site conditions been addressed (shade, existing trees, slope, soil type etc)?
Are spot levels or RLs clearly legible?
Is there clear delineation between existing and proposed levels?
Do graphics meet Australian standards (AS1100) and a high industry standard?
Are correct botanical names and nomenclature used?
Is there a title block and north point?
Does the written specification refer to applicable relevant standards and codes?
Do the documents (plans, details, schedules and specifications) provide clarity on what is being proposed so that contractor/s are able to provide unambiguous comparable quotations?
Have standard details/documents been altered to be specific to this project?
Do they comply with relevant standards and codes?
Are the proposed constructed element details in accordance with best practice - are they buildable?
Landscape Management Plans submitted will be assessed on the following criteria:
Is the Management plan presented in a professional manner?
Is it easy to read?
Is it correctly referenced?
Are figures noted?
Is there a table of contents?
2.Report Writing Technique
Is there an executive summary?
Is there an introduction setting out the aims and limitations of the plan?
Is the methodology clear?
Are the observations clearly presented?
Is there a balanced discussion of the observations?
Are the conclusions drawn based on the observations and subsequent discussion?
Is the plan written with terminology suitable for the readership?
Is the report technically correct?
Are the recommendations aligned with industry best practice, are they practical and achievable?