I like what you have done so far with your landscaping, and the fact that you have massed groupings of same type of plants and repeated them around the garden makes your garden look as if a landscape architect was involved, as this is a common approach for them. I would suggest that you consider using either perennials or ground covers as the filler within and between your more permanent shrubs, whatever is fast growing and takes your local conditions, as temporary filler which will ultimately be overtaken by the shrubs as they fill in. I would resist the temptation to fill in with more permanent, large growing shrubs that would eventually be too crowded or need moving.

Sorry I wouldn't be much help with suggesting actual plant species to use in your zone, as I garden in a USDA zone 10 location in northern California, and know virtually nothing of gardening in Minnesota.

Wow, what a lot of work to put in all those plants!! They look great, a lot of my favorites. You are going to be surprised at how much they fill in in the next couple of years. You can always fill in with some annuals for now. Maybe some impatiens or begonias? I don't know what's still available in the nurseries. I would wait until late next spring or even next fall before doing any editing. The first year of a landscape is so different from the next couple of years. Live with it a year, you will make better decisions. I learned the hard way after digging out a bunch of stuff this year that looked great at first when I put it in two years ago, but hasn't held up well over time.

Well, here's a situation, coincidentally, where I think it is easier to see what's wrong than what's right, so I'll apologize in advance if I'm missing the benefits of this planting and focussing in on what I don't like.

I think Bahia has hit on something that you are doing that contradicts at least one, if not two, of your stated objectives, which is to make it look not too corporate, namely, using repetitions of the same plant. I have the same limitation he has in that I garden in a zone where I can grow a lot more variety, but I still think there is too much similarity here. I like things dense and overlapping too (that's part of my personal definition of layering) but to me a key component of doing that is contrasting foliage - colour, shape, size, or texture. When you overlap identical or even similar plants, I think you lose the point of close or overlapping plantings. My personal nirvana in this department is rhododendrons and japanese maples growing together. And a variety of each with widely contrasting foliage.

Another combination I like a lot, for all that it is almost overused, is ferns and hostas. If I had that bed of Ostrich ferns I would have planted ten different ferns rather than ten of a single kind and would now interplant extensively with hostas, hellebores, and a bunch of other stuff that I don't even know whether it is hardy in your zone. You can certainly add a variety of ferns even now. (I will also just mention that Ostrich ferns travel, so I'm not sure I'd have them in open ground - but they will probably travel mostly downhill in pursuit of water in this case).

I do understand that with this amount of space you need to repeat plants to make an impact, but I think what looks corporate is that they are in a fairly regimental arrangements. I think what is supposed to happen for a more natural look is to group the plants together in more organically shaped drifts, and then plant something contrasting in another group next to them.

I do agree with LPink that it is probably not a good idea to overplant now and that annuals might be something good to include both now and in future years, just for some year-to-year variety. But I just don't see in some cases that letting very similar things grow together is going to achieve the look that I think I hear you saying you want.

KarinL

The house jumps out at me as not being considered as part of the garden other than an edge. You landscaped your walk which just left the house hanging out there. I'm curious to know why you used that approach. There seems to be a lot of things written these days that make people afraid to deal with the house in fear that they will be out of style. The house is there and one way or another you'll have to deal with it in your planning, or it will deal with you.

Very nice job on the widow boxes, by the way.

Can't add much other than to say you've done a yeoman's job so far. But if the ostrich fern is new to you, this is about the time they're in their full glory and by this time in August you'll definitely notice their seasonal decline - the fronds will take on a more yellowish tinge then go to brown quite quickly. Has nothing to do with water, or lack thereof; simply what they do here.

Something to ponder would be what, if anything, to plant in front of or interspersed with the ferns as you will be faced with a patch of empty for a few years otherwise. However, once the ferns start to spread and your initial 30 becomes many more it won't be much of an issue. After a year or two in the ground, they will start to crown high, somewhat reminiscent of cypress knees. So if you cut the fronds you'll have an empty patch with brown mounds. I have many OFs - some of them being 4 and 5' tall, and I can't imagine being without them, but I do cut them down when they brown out and just live with the cleared space since mine is not primarily a showcase area.

I like the side beds and the slope, they'll be looking lush and lovely in a couple of years. For a ground cover near the ferns, I'd consider ajuga, or wild ginger. The only thing I don't like is the row of boxwoods by the front walk. This area could have more variety, since it's the one you see up close. A place for plants whose looks (or smell) you like best; something that has meaning for you. I'm not saying a mass planting is bad here; I can well imagine large patches of low-growing ground covers - just not in orderly rows.

In your forth picture showing the house and how it rises out of the slope seems a little unsettling to me.

Some more substantial space filling foundation plants here to transition the house into the landscape would make the house seem more 'grounded' to me at least.

Thank you! And laag, thanks for noticing the window boxes. They are 5' monsters and they are new and were my first effort at planting anything - seriously. 50 plants went into those things, and I have a learned a few things, even just from that little project.

I want to explore a little more of the comments that seemed to say in a few ways the house is basically off by itself. Is that a matter of the foundation plantings being on ground-level at this point? I think those forsythia fiesta should get up to 3' or so - I was trying not to get something so large it would obscure the window boxes but would instead "support" them. And the magnolias and physocarpus and cotinus and sambucas I had though would bring some height contrast to the lower-growing plants...? The spirea 'tor' are not that thrilling right now (and look a lot like the boxwood, frankly), but they should give some color in fall. When the forsythia fiesta are bigger, I am hopiing the variegation will provide some interest as well. But I am still lacking some meshing I want to see.

karinl, I am completely with you. I love to/want to play with textures - I'm kind of a texture/tactile freak and use those contrasts inside the house quite a bit. I am taking these plantings and considering them perhaps backbone plantings. I absolutely want to bring something else to that swath of ferns in the front (which, frankly, seems to me too rounded - I'd rather it swooped across the front horizontally a bit more, so I may add some additional/different ones...). I hadn't considered hostas in the front of the house, as I have hostas in other areas and also hadn't for some reason envisioned them on that slope. Hellebores, though, I am dying to add - I am kind of overwhelmed with the options in places I want to fill in. I don't think I included much showing what the bottom of that front slope looks like, but it slopes down to pretty woods that would love some ferns and woodland plants...I would eventually like to connect the "developed" area with the wilder part.

As to those boxwoods, timbu...I do like having something that will still be a factor in the winter, and it needed something relatively small or you'd just block the whole front of the house, but perhaps, in addition to annuals there are other ways to soften it? It is a bit soldierly. Would you take out some and add a little height or texture variation? Or just add perennials with elongated or other types of leaves. Or irregularly widen the bed?

I was thinking something lower than the box... heathers, or thyme, or cotoneaster, or creeping junipers. For reddish foliage, dwarf barberries such as Bagatelle (check the hardiness!). Some of those Thor spiraeas could be on the outer side of the path - grouped into natural-looking drifts. Variegated grasses would be good too.
What if the boxwood was placed in, say, groups of 3 or 5 instead of in a row? Don't hurry to change things - it might be easier to experiment with annuals first, to get an idea of how the various plant heights work in one or another layout.

Thanks, timbu. I don't mind the height of the boxwoods (*as they are now*, and they are new) - they are lower than the ones across the walk will be when grown, which was the idea (expanding the "foundation area" while working with a walkway that could not be moved and which hugged too closely to the house, imo, all while not blocking the foundation plantings from view or closing in the walkway) - but I am thinking about the variation. I like the idea of groupings and bringing in some other things. Barberries would complement the coloration used elsewhere, though maybe some brightening is or will be warranted (and besides, I'm angry with barberries at the moment because one lodged a thorn in my thumb 3 weeks ago and it's still there! and painful!). I also want some floppier things - longer or softer foliage, maybe.

I do agree with you - I'm not going to make changes anytime soon but will play and experiment with it. I think a part of me was attracted to the notion of boxwoods because I like a touch of formality...but the rest of what I like tends to veer toward the natural and the jumbly (I can't wait to experiment with underplanting...when I feel ready!). So perhaps it's an example of clinging to fancies or outdated notions...so my challenge will be, over time, figuring out how to blend or modify that line.

I think the first picture of the house precedes the planting of the forsythias, magnolia, and physocarpus. That will improve the look that concerns Isabella. But I would want something evergreen there, I think?

KarinL