You could probably head back the longest shoots to a leaf node to balance the shape but young JM's often produce very long whippy growth that looks awkward until the rest of the tree "grows into it" :-) Which it does rather rapidly, often in just a season or two.

Personally, I would leave it alone. The fact that Asian maples like plamatums and japonicums do develop asymmetrical habits and uneven crowns is I think one of their most desirable features.

I hope you realize that this selection will fill that area and then overflow into both the sidewalk and driveway in time? This gets to be a rather widely spreading selection in time and could exceed 20'x20' in not too many more years.

Thanks. I'll probably leave it then. I have no experience pruning (well) anyway.

I did realize it would spread but expected it to grow relatively up and out. I haven't seen very many large ones here. I've seen a couple right next to driveways and houses but they've been limbed up, up and up to where just the top 1/3 has leaves (yes, it looks bad).

Should I worry that the tree will intrude into the driveway and sidewalk? I need both to still be usable without the tree looking awkward. Another option I have is to swap the Aconitifolium with one of the Stewartia I have nearby. Both are under powerlines (~20 feet), but at least the Stewartia with its narrower, slower growth may be a better fit for this spot, if indeed I should worry. I consider that drastic though. I have a small list of trees I'm excited about and have a very small yard under power lines, and was hopeful I picked small enough specimens to be ok.

Maybe I should have put the Aconitifolium in the middle of the right flower bed below, and had that be my only tree. But how can one possibly plant just one tree? Now is the time to fix my mistakes, while the trees are young.

If none of it is rootstock sprouts - as appears to be the case - it should just be left alone.

Except for moving it to a spot that is big enough for it! Picture it the size of that coral bark maple next door and you are starting to get the idea.

If the stewartia is one of the more common ones like Stewartia pseudocamellia or S. monadelpha those will be even less suitable for a bed that small. And harder to prune back in anything like an attractive fashion.

Some Seattle records are:

Stewartia monadelpha 41 ft. tall in 2004-5 from a 1948 accession

S. pseudocamellia 42 ft. tall in 2004-5 from a 1945 accession

S. rostrata 27 ft. tall with an average crown spread of 26 ft. in 2003

S. serrata 31 ft. tall in 2004-5 from a 1954 accession

If you are collecting trees you are going to have to spread them around through the whole property in order to get them to all fit. Rather than trying to confine them to comparatively small beds with proximal features (like utility lines and public sidewalks) they are going to conflict with.

Yep!

Thanks a lot for your comments. I'll have to think about it. The lawn is non-negotiable for the next 10 years (kids). Yards without trees are missing something to give it balance. I was hoping the aconitifolium would strike that balance. I'm still not entirely convinced it is too small for that spot, but I'm definitely more nervous now.

That's a nana gracilis between the Stewartia. I understand that'll get too big too, in many years. I know it may be anathema to say this, but worst case scenario I'll enjoy my trees for the next 10-20 years then have to uproot them. That'll be quite sad, but less sad than the lilac bush and pampas grass that they took the place of. I trust that these trees will get big eventually.

Of course, that's not an excuse for planting poorly, and I'd prefer to get it right.

It's probably time I hire a designer sometime in the next few years. I can't design--only copy designs and/or hope for the best, and I'm having a hard time getting what I want. Frankly, I enjoy plants and working in my garden... but getting the right things in the right places is a bit stressful! Putting in plants you like but not getting it to look chaotic, having structure and year-long greenery. Even if you can always replace things, there's some level of stress to put the things you want to mature (trees) in the right spot as quickly as possible.

If you have an adequately lawned and roomy backyard, you do not need to maintain a front lawn also - let the kids play in the back!! When you look at the long term value of a landscape, it is primarily how it compliments and accents the house. How that landscape is used will be extremely variable as to the specific homeowner so as long as you can accommodate both personal usage with curb appeal, you are ahead of the game. Keep the play space to the back (or friends and neighbors' yards) and create the garden you want in front. Much safer for the kids to be in the back as well, away from traffic and stranger danger elements.

10 years is too long to wait with respect to the trees' placement. By that time they will be too large to move easily and without damage. Bring in a designer now to help you work through these issues. It is possibly the best investment you will make in your garden and one of the least expensive.

btw, there is a current thread on the Landscape Design forum on "grassless front yards" that you might find interesting.