You've done a lovely job so far. Did you do this all yourself?

Re. the little additional wall. NO. It breaks the flow and will look odd. You will have trouble filling it well with plants. No. Don't do it. No.

Also, I'm not sure which rock you are thinking of moving, but I think the rocks are a plus; I'd leave them.

As to plants, perhaps you need to consider plants for dry shade. Certainly take advantage of the sunlight in the spring when the trees are bare by planting a selection spring bulbs. I think reticulated irises, daffodils, snowdrops, and so forth would be lovely. Then follow up with. among other things, a great selection of hostas...check out White Flower Farms great hosta collection.

Wow! I lack the qualifications to answer your inquiry, but i just wanted to say what a gorgeous job you've done. It's just lovely ...

I think the overall design is being impacted by the wilderness beyond the edge of your cultivated and tamed yard. I have the same issues at my house, which abuts mature conservation forest. The wild trees are wide and tall horizontal forms punctuated by pockets of darkness. Without some larger shrubs or evergreens there will be a gap in wall of vegetation from the low level to the lower level of the tree canopy. A wide shrub border may be a way of adding more grounding to the trees or installing larger trees/shrubs for a transition in heights down to the level of the lawn.

Another way to ground the tree and tie together the tiered walls is to put in a more substantial fence. These are the approaches I have taken to compete with my forest background.

Perhaps you could move the big rock from top right to bottom left and sink it into the hill there, so you can skip the stub wall which I agree would be an abomination. Lovely lines to your walls so far.

Not sure about this, and the photo might not be clear, but could the bottom wall use another row of stone so the level behind it is flat? Just a thought.

I'm not going to be much help with the planting - I'm just planting up my own new raised beds, and I am pretty much making it up as I go along - but then I have all the plants and can set them up, look at them, and move them around till I like them.

KarinL

Try more photoshop to experiment with different plant heights - tall shrubs, wide shrubs, masses of ground covers - to see how they affect the visibility of the stone walls and the overall impression. Keep each on a separate layer so you can move them around.
As to the loose big rock, I'd put it in front of the jap.maple, partially under the edge of the other rock. Come to think of it.. I'd put that on a separate photoshop layer too, and keep moving around until happy.

All, thank you for the input so far. It makes me feel better that a seemingly nice area is tough to design. I am very surprised that it's a no on the smaller wall tying into the lower wall. I was thinking that it would break up the virtually identical contour curves of the other walls and add curve and character.
isabella, I think that you have identified the problem of transition. Now I have to figure out what to do. I can plant some native shrubs on my side of the fence to start. Just on the other side of the fence are colonies of sweetshrub so I could move some forward and augment with other types. Although the wire fence isn't pretty, it is minimal visual impact and separation.
Both sites for the large rock are good. Below the larger rock by the japanese maple is a huge rock at the surface so digging it in may be a problem.
I really like hostas with their wide variety of sizes and colors but I'm concerned that it may be too dry for them. I may have to ammend the topsoil that I have backfilled with the plentiful red clay.
Thanks again for the ideas. I'd appreciate more. As always, they have been very helpful.

Nice walls, nice setting. Is that big flat rock toward the top suitable for a bench, if raised up a bit?

It may not be true when on site, but in the photo, the japanese maple looks misplaced. It seems dimnished by its proximity to the large grey tree trunk. I would move it up, down, or to the other side of the large rock next to it. Again, it may be the perspective of the photo.

I really like the bright foliage of the chartreuse smokebush. I've no idea of its mature size, but perhaps it's an element that could be repeated? It's a nice foil for the burgundy of the j. maple.

This looks to be a likely setting for hostas, but I hesitate to name plants, being utterly unfamiliar with gardens in your area. But the shape of hostas -- low mounds of larger-scaled leaves -- would be attractive with the stone. Then maybe some slightly taller, darker foliage plants that send up flower spikes for the mid-ground. On the highest level I'd be tempted to grow herbs around the stone "bench", just for the scent of the leaves.

Some hostas are tough enough to like it dry. I've had one called Yellow River growing in a shallow pot for several years with afternoon sun, and it has been fine. The hosta forum people can probably give you more such names. I'd maybe also add H. ventricosa and 'Sum and Substance', but really, most other than the delicate thin-leaved ones are pretty tough. Ferns can also take it pretty dry, at least in the PNW - especially Polystichum and Dryopteris. Also, if you're concerned about drought, consider waiting till fall or even early spring to plant, as newly planted material in summer has a real challenge.

One thing I try with my walls is to use them to exaggerate the height difference between plants; tall ones at the top of the wall, low spreading ones at the bottom. That puts at least some of the taller plants at each level more into the middle of each terrace or the front rather than what I think is often the opening assumption, that tall goes at the back. I also can't resist draping the odd plant over the wall as well. If that sounds contradictory, it is only meant to say you use the wall differently at different places, so you don't get a soldierly arrangement.

KarinL

catkim, the smokebush should get 6-8' and I really like to use chartreuse or bright foliage to brighten up shady areas and backdrops. There are a number of hostas that can be used similarly. I will have to look at the area from a wider perspective to see if I like the bench idea. I may need to put something up there with it to make it balance.

karinl, I will check the hosta forum. In another part of my hard, I lost a couple of beautiful guacamole hostas last year to the drought and southern blight. I think that I understand what you are saying about using the walls and I like it.
I won't plant anything that I can't keep watered during the drought. It's kind of limiting but it may allow planting the major items.
I really appreciate all the good ideas.

Physocarpus "Dart's Gold" and many/most of the Mock Orange varieties are chartreuse. There are some interesting conifers with tones other than green, too, that would do well in GA. The Conifers Forum people are a helpful bunch.

The hosta forum was very helpful and I'll check out conifers to see if 3-4 hours sun will be enough. I may put some native azaleas of different heights just on my side of the fence to help the transition from natural to cultivated.
Unfortunately, I don't have photoshop so I'll struggle with "paint" to see if I can get a combination of heights, shapes and colors.
I think that a variety of hostas and ferns may be the overall fill. Bulbs for spring. I'd like to have something for winter. I'm not sure that conifers fit the overall scheme. Some small, broad leafed evergreens could work.
Thanks again for getting me unstuck.

Anumber of camelias will take afternoon sun and less water better than azaleas (still can use azaleas as well--just gives you some additional evergreen shrubs that make a good background and have nice dark green foliage that I like as a foil for lime or chartreuse, as much or better than burgundy, plus you get fall flowers. Oakleaf hydrangeas are another good choice for woodland look, though I find they need more water than camelias (after established).

If you actually want to create more shade, and also create better transition between your large trees and the beds below, you've got a great area for a dogwood or 2, which would look terrific against the woodsy backdrop. You can find smaller varieties if you are concerned that some of the standard varieties will eventually overpower the beds. Small trees like that actually look more natural than the JM you've got there. There are other JM varieties that have a wilder, more understory look.

Frankie, Yuletide camelias are doing poorly in a simliar situation about 75' away but other cultivars could be a good backdrop. You may be right about the JM. I moved it from the front yard last year, I can always move it again. It's doing very well where it is for the first year afer transplant and the drought.

I have "painted" in my first ideas using native azaleas and hostas. I would like comments. I am still struggling.
Thanks

{{gwi:36858}}

Steve,

I agree that the Japanese maple should be moved. I'd like to see some sort of ground cover on several of the terraces, something low enough that it wouldn't hide those lovely walls, and would help tie everything together. Incorporating one of those fallen tree trunks might be nice.

Since it's such a natural setting, I'd avoid lining things up in rows. A mountain laurel (or something else that grows in the wild) would be appropriate at the back edge, near the woods.

Something that would hang down over the walls would be nice. Does prostrate rosemary grow in your zone?

I'd also stain those fence posts a darker color so they blend in with the background.

Something like this maybe?:
{{gwi:36860}}

I think what isabella said defines the delimma - and it is reinforced by the improvement in treelover's drawing. You need a better plan to transition the woods to the lawn. Use loose native plantings to make that transition from one environment to the next.

Unfortunately, based on the uptick in the heat and the downtick in the moisture, I think you should plan on doing the work in the fall.

treelover, that's lovely! You are so right about the JM and I like how you really took advantage of the graceful swoop of the bottom bed. What your design does is let the plants look like they are flowing gently down the hill, a nice effect.

I also find that red J Maples do not stand out from foliage backgrounds very well. They are much more effective elevated or distanced from full backgrounds of green foliage.

Another way to improve the overall terrace is to take advantage of the evening gown affect. I give it that name in honor of a young Lithuanian woman (from my father's hometown) that my wife sometimes works with, but that is neither here nor there. Let's say that a particular gown is very beautiful no matter the shape of who wears it. It can not be denied that when the gown is worn by the the one whom it best fits, both the gown and the wearer are all that much more attractive.

I am, of course, refering to having the topography amply fill the retaining walls. There are different degrees of tailoring, of course. Our Lithuanian friend fills the retaining walls in such a way that you neither feel that the walls are inadequate or overbuilt making a wonderful landscape.

I think that while the retaining walls in the above pictures (in the thread rather than those that were just painted) make a nice evening gown, additional topography would make that gown more dazzling.

Long story short, I believe that adding some more soil above the retaining walls will enhance, if I can use that term, the landscape.

Maybe someone already said it, but keep thinking about understory natives as your transitional plants. And a pagoda or kousa dogwood has such strong horizonal lines that it would be a good contrast to the strong verticals of the mature tree trunks. If viburnums do well, a shasta might be gorgeous. Remember think 4 season interest. The kousas have red fruits by summer (a problem if you are a neatnic) and shasta viburum has fruit too, after its magnificent mid spring show.

Shucks, why don't you give up some of that lawn and plant native viburnums, amelanchier, disease resistant dogwoods, sourwood the list goes on. Lovelier than grass, less water, bird and wildlife friendly, a million reasons why.

You have a lovely setting and a lot of good ideas. Do viburnum work in your area? They make nice transitional shrubs into woods to provide a middle backdrop. There are so many from which to choose.

Are there deer in those woods or is there a fence attached to the fence posts? Hostas are deer candy. Astilbes and ferns are deer-resistant. They munch my heuchera in winter, but leave it alone in summer...but, that's the herd that visits my garden. Deer preferences vary by region. I've had deer leave my azaleas alone at one house and eat them at another house.

I'm not a big believer in the native transition concept. My observation tells me that takes away from ornamental composition by obscuring where it begins and where it ends. I see that declaring what is garden over what is woodland makes the composition clear.

Looking at the original photo, there is what appears to be a native understory. If it works, why make the garden smaller by addiing more? If it does not work, why will it work better if you add new native plants?

I would suggest that the native foliage behind the J Maple is absorbing it which is why many of you want to move it. The more you bring that foliage out, the farther you'll need to move the maple to isolate it.

Over the weekend, you all have given me a lot to digest. Most of the time, the engineer in me overrides creativity and I need help to create a pleasing design. I end up planting and moving and planting and moving until the picture clarifies for me.
Treelover-thank you for taking the time to show another (better)design for the area. Stain the fence posts-brilliant! Prostrate rosmary may be at its limit here and I may like the dark green color you show rather than the blue green of the rosemary.
Laag- There will be soil added and mulch to the areas above the walls. I have been working on two other areas that need drainage control and didn't have the energy to wheelbarrow the additional top soil uphill yet. The design sketch by Treelover does not have much transition and the JM is moved forward away and not so engulfed. If both areas are real and belong, they can be side by side. I guess the principle of unity by is met by both being real and belonging.
Idabean and wonbyherwits- I definately would like to incorporate viburnum and either/both dogwoods. Both have been on my list to get. I had not decided where they fit yet. Their size may engulf what ever is the primary focal point, unless one of them is it.
Esh-I hear you on the timing and obvoiusly I struggling with the plan. But, the input from all will make my start better.
Again thank you for your help and ideas. I especially appreciate the diversity. I hope the interest continues.

I'm afraid I can't make the maple fit no matter what. A hodgepodge of color against a green background will not be harmonious. You already have light and dark green, and to add the red of the maple in my mind seems like too much. Have you considered species camellias? I saw one in a botanical garden and found it to be much more graceful than the hybrids. As a backbone to the design for winter I would definitely think about evergreens and would in fact make them the most important consideration. Also, as someone mentioned, why so much lawn? To me there is no interest in that large area at all. I wonder if you could at least break up the grassy area with groups of specimen shrubs or small flowering trees.

I hope I didn't sound too critical. In the final analysis it's your property and has to feel wonderful to you. And please don't get discouraged if some of your plantings turn out to be wrong choices. It happens to all of us and, quite often, a better place for them can be found on your property. Ask me how I know.

Regards,

Ingrid

Ingrid-thank you for your suggestions. I am asking for critism. It helps to learn and improve and all has been given constructively. I absolutely am concerned about the winter structure as you indicate and that needs to be addressed. I value the pattern and textures in a garden more than concerns about color. What does bother me is the "Japanese" part of the maple without any other asian influence in the garden area.
Sorry about the expanse of lawn but it provides a feeling of openness and ties in the various areas of my yard. If it makes one feel a little better, all the areas below the two lower walls was lawn that I removed to make more garden room.

More ideas on plant selection, if not design per se:

I've been impressed with the drought-resistance of several ferns, particularly holly ferns and autumn fern; both are essentially evergreen in zone 7 and can provide winter interest and a great foil for hostas, so that you don't look at blank mulch for 5-6 months. Both are available quite cheaply if you need a fair volume, and of course they spread by clumping and can be divided to make more. These can serve as "ground cover" in areas where you might not want a rampant groundcover, and maintain the woodland look.

From a design standpoint, plants like that can provide "unity"--you are at some risk of having a planting hodgepodge in your beds; but if you're like me, you may have to go the hodgepodge route as a learning curve and then work your way back.

Someone smarter than I may be able to describe how you might position plants of particular forms and colors to take advantage of the beds as a whole, so that your eye travels over the terraced plantings in a pleasing way and is not jarred by the wrong types of contrasts.

The stone walls afford you a great deal more diversity in your planting selections. Unity is less of a problem because of that.

I would not concern myself with the "Japanese" part of the J. Maple. Think of it as what it is - a red foliaged tree. That is a tangible influence on its appearance. Where it comes from or what it is called is not going to influence its appearance. They grow just fine without stone lanterns next to them.

I think a brilliant detail in Treelover's design is what looks like a pathway or steps (below the bottom wall) into the woods, or the pathway that might be there. I wonder if transition is a human concept - not that the plants need to make any transition, but that it should look as though a human could do so.

When the maple disappears, it is not against the green of the forest understory but against the black spaces between the trunks. Even against the understory it is not too exciting because there is a similar leaf texture, exacerbated by the darkness those leaves are in. Even in Treelover's placement, it will disappear if the background is soil. But put a couple of hostas behind it and it will pop. Something bright green ideally with big leaves is, I think, it's ideal backdrop. Mind you my mom has a low one growing in a dense patch of sweet woodruff that looks spectacular just now.

Apropos drought-tolerant ferns I would put in a word for the Royal fern, Osmunda regalis. This has grown in my driest, shadiest spot for years.

KarinL

Frankie-thanks, ferns can go anywhere and I have some Christmas ferns that are also evergreen. They are planted in clay so they don't dry out. Yep, I'm like you.
Laag-I always read what you say twice to see if I understand. One thing that I don't like is gardens that are composed of plants and things that do/could not occur together naturally/climatewise ie. bananna trees in a spruce garden. I guess I need to get over that and pay more attention to form, color and texture.
The walls were made to stop erosion and provide a place for plants to survive. There is virtually no garden without the walls. Are you saying that because I have made a place for a garden that formerly would have none, some design concepts are less important? If that is what you are saying, I will probably belive it.
Karin-thanks for the identification of the importance of backdrop and fern recommnedation. I'm still thinking about transition and you have brought up another facet.
Thanks again all.

There's a conflict of scale between the Japanese maple (a mini-tree) and the grove of much bigger trees behind. It would probably be better to plant only shrubs in front of the woods. To maintain the visual flow of the bed use mostly small-leaved shrubs - especially in the narrow parts of the bed - with one or two larger-leaved shrubs only where the bed widens and extends into the lawn. Since you are in Zone 7 you can give the planting yearround solidity by using mostly evergreen shrubs (mostly broad-leaved, with maybe a few coniferous).

I agree with what Bboy is saying in that it is easier to deal with the scale by not trying to introduce a conflict. It introduces a whole lot of different things that you have to deal with, but it can also create opportunities to do something a little more interesting as well. It just depends on how comfortable you feel about it and how willing you are to experiment, observe, assess, and change until you get something good. Most people do not really want to invest in that much experimentation. They want to plan it once and plant it once.

Stevega,
I'm saying that the walls build very strong unity and when you build in a little more soil and add plants it will show. The unity is based on continuity of one strong material - the rocks AND by the "containing" quaility of the walls. That will hold a composition of different forms, color, and texture a lot more than a flat garden and simple foliage. In other words, it is strong enough that takes a lot more of an attack on it to overcome that unifying element. That is a good thing if you want to use multiple forms, colors, and textures. You can do more of that and it will hold together better.

I would still suggest that isolation is what is working in the mockup of the moved maple. I think Karin said that it was not the green that absorbed it. Look at the mockup that everyone seams to agree looks better and cover the lower part where the trunk is isolated in front of the wall. Where you can see only the foliage in front of the background it is absorbed and all but disappears in a green background. It is the isolation of the trunk that makes everyone see it as looking good. I use that trick all the time.

Another good way to pop a J. Maple is to elevate it. It then becomes a challenge to not make it look like you tried to elevate it. You can get away with anything as long as you can do things around it to make it work. If you don't have a context, you can build a context. If you like the form of the maple, get it to show as much as you can. If you like the color, make sure you don't lose it against a bad background.

J. Maples are often placed this way. I'm not saying that it is only something I do. It is done often enough that most people think J. Maples are a focal point of their own no matter what you do with it. Clearly, the original picture shows one with almost nothing around it, yet it is hardly a strong focal point.

Treelover moved it over distancing it from everything which makes it more dominant. Adding low growth below it and to the left of it with a sharply contrasting color lifts it. The stone behind the trunk brings it forward. The wall in front adds more depth. All of it adds up to isolating its beauty.

This is one of the most civil, productive threads on designing a garden "nearly" from scratch. Stevega you get a lot of credit for being really open to ideas while also acknowledging that your engineering orientation is a factor- though not unchangeable- in your first thoughts and reactions to suggestions. Anyway, after reading yet more dismal headlines this small slice of life reminds me that civility is alive and well in small corners of the world. Thanks, from someone who had a particularly hard day at work.

"The isolation of the trunk"...Laag, that was truly an "ah-ha" moment for me! That is one of those little pearls of wisdom that can really make a difference when trying to sort out a landscape or garden design. Thank you for that.

bboy-Do you think that "transition" would lessen the conflict by having mid size trees (dogwood)/large shrubs (viburnum) as has been suggested (Idabean, Wonby, Esh)? I am leaning that way.
Laag-thanks again for the clarification. I was thinking of unity with the surounding/nearby areas rather than within the area.
I definately have no problem with trying things and moving them around. Each time you make a change, you learn what was not good and what is better and design principles become less abstract and more meaningful. What sucks is when the first arrangement was better.
I have used my hands for isolation of areas but not to eliminate parts of plants. Thanks for a good tool.
Idabean-thanks for the kind words. I'm sure all who contributed appreciate them. Especially, in design there is no perfectly right answer. If you enjoy what you are doing and are confident, you appreciate that others would take the time and interest to offer you their knowledge and opinions. The positive aspects of others openly sharing their ideas doesn't leave much fertile ground for negativity or incivility. If it sprouts, ignore it. It will go away or even better-it may change.

I do like the bed-shape, and how it takes a rectangular area and gives it an organic shape. The curve of the bed with the stairs being reflected in the hill-side bed shape really unifies the whole area.

The hill-side bed shape, being a triangular salient into the yard is also a great setting for a focal point, located near the apex, of some sort. This focal point will serve as a transitional device, like an axle, to encourage movement of the eye throughout the landscape.