This is a really great question to consider. However, the reality is that a large portion of the profession revolves around large scale housing or commercial development(s). The Architects design the building(s), the engineers grade it and LA’s (or whatever you want to call it) design plans for the rest of the “landscape” features. Those plans go to “landscape contractors” to build. I’m afraid as much as we would like to re-invent what our role may be “a rose is a rose is a rose” probably applies here. I think another great question is: has the specialization in this process weakened each profession or strengthened them? The building architects also have the ability to provide these functions as well and they are hired before LA’s are, but most of them haven’t wanted to do it in the past. Will the current economic situation change that? The question as what may be killing the profession probably is something more than the word “scape” attached to it. I fear that we’ve done a great job of building things up in our own minds based on “loose” information and we now have the dubious task of facing reality. You are absolutely correct that BIG problems need BIG answers and Central Park is a perfect example of that. As long as we are “making a living” as LA’s then we will never achieve what F.L. Olmsted (check your spelling) did because he was a journalist and a park designer and NOT a Landscape Architect in the sense we think of today. I’m a little disappointed to hear your comment about your fees being more than the entire backyard budget and seems a little arrogant in a day and age when a large percent of LA’s are out of work. Additionally, I have yet to see any “urban design” in America that doesn’t revolve around major retail chain(s) and overpriced housing. Maybe 2010 is the time to face the facts instead of running from them? I hope so.
