From an aesthetic standpoint it would be better if the original grade was restored, by taking the wall away and raking the soil out so that the gentle contour of the slope was not interrupted. From a practical standpoint some issues may perhaps develop with the trees having fill placed next to their trunks. This depends on how prone to mishap the particular kinds of trees they are happen to be about filling beneath them (and against their crowns), as well as how porous the fill soil used is, and probably what condition the trees were in before the fill was made.

Enlarging the bed and planted out farther away from the tree trunks and root flairs might work better, if you include evergreen shrubs and other tall enough plants in the planting the fact that there is an empty space around each trunk does not have to be apparent from the lawn.

bboy,

thanks for your response. In response to you point that aesthetically, we'd be better off leaving the natural slope: This particular area of our yard receives the majority of the drainage from both our yard and our neighbors which was causing some significant erosion. We chose to use diversion to control the runoff...so returning to natural grade is not an option. Because of having to deal with the erosion, we opted to go ahead an put a level bed in there to allow a seating location in the yard. Currently there are not any comfortable seating areas out there and that's where my kids spend a large amount of time. We wanted something close to them but separate, hence the new seating idea where we dealt with the erosion.

I also appreciate your concern for the trees. They are straight oak and we've been careful about the type of soil we used to fill and to not pile dirt around the crown... they are very healthy trees. We've consulted with an arborist and have followed his directions.

To your last point about enlarging the bed, I'm a little unclear on what you're suggesting. I wasn't so much worried about how the trees looked at the base (the shrubs on each side are redtwig dogwoods which should fill in to the base of the tree) but how the adirondack chairs would look with nothing behind them--like they were floating. Do you not think that would be a problem? Maybe I'm making more of it than I should...

It really doesn't look bad to me, Lauren. Maybe the camera is blurring the drop off, but if I hadn't seen the first picture, I would not have expected a retaining wall to be there.

If the drop off looks worse in person than it does in the picture, you could plant some shade loving shrubs or tall ferns in the lower section behind the chairs. I'd go for something loose and airy, not a dense hedge. Is the French drain right at the base of the retaining wall or is it further away? Whatever you plant will have to be able to tolerate excess moisture and not cause root interference with the French drain.

Is all the grass sloped? I was going to say you could put the chairs in front of the fully planted-out bed. I don't see the bed as "floating" myself. Truly, I don't think it's an issue as long as you enjoy sitting there.

Hi Lauren,

I, too, am a long time lurker but I thought that the current climate of this forum might benefit from some new blood.

The wall doesn't bother me so much as the "rolli-polliness" of the slope above and around it. This particular flat area looks a bit weird to me in the midst of all the other uneveness. Can any of the lumps and bumps be flattened out a bit? Probably, that's the backwards way of saying what bboy said--only with the emphasis on accommodating your wall instead of removing it. Also, I'm wondering if the size and shape of the bed can be increased in all directions both above and below the wall so the wall itself wouldn't be so much of a feature and the kidney-bean shape, which looks kind of artificial as-is, will be lessened.

Do you think that you will feel like you are in danger of falling off the wall when you are sitting there in the chairs? I think that I might feel that way. To correct this, in addition to enlarging the whole area, I might plant a knee-height mixed shrub border inside the wall with the seating area just inside that. I'd consider planting more, larger shrubs to the outsides of the trees to tie the whole area into the landscape more (I see you have some planted already and they will probably look better as they grow a bit).

i'm certainly no expert, but I think it looks fine. If you're worried about the chairs "floating", it might look nice to have a sort of border of small hedges right above that wall, to close it in. That way instead of just sitting on a landing, you have a cozy effect.

{{gwi:23844}}

I'm not sure I understand the question, but mostly because I'm not sure which way the chairs will be oriented. It is often more comfortable to feel a little enclosed, especially behind where one is sitting, so in that sense, depending on where you place the chairs, the idea of having some shrubby plantings behind or in a semi-circle around the seating area, embracing it sort of, can give a cozier feel. Arbors can serve the same purpose. You would have to balance that with how it fits into the bed in general or affects other views. But you can achieve a sense of enclosure without having massive plantings. Even some large container plantings can do that. And don't have to be stiff--ferns, other informal things you might find under trees.

Why do the flower beds have to be under the trees?

OK, Ink--can you tell me more about your comment? For instance, would woodland shrubs and groundcovers be acceptable but not flowers? Are you a supporter of a design priciple that trees should stand alone in beds? Or that trees ought not to have other landscape elements grafted onto them?

For my part, I think that typical understory shrubs like azaleas and woodland groundcovers like gingers or epimediums would look appropriate here but not impatiens and tulips.

I'm not trying to be snarky, I really want to know--sorry to say I haven't been reading the forum diligently enough to know if you've already expressed an opinion on this point.

Not a comment sammie, a question. Why are you so angry? also a question.

Not angry at all....Actually, I thought that your comment was a rhetorical question and it seemed like an excellent opportunity to engender a theory-oriented discussion-- It's possible that I have some left-over, pent-up angst about not being able to convert the tree-circle poster to a better way of thinking (another thread) but I don't think I let it spill over into my comment here?

I guess my assumption about SOMETHING going on under the tres was because that's where the wall already is--and I think it would look better if there were more elements (like plants) around to make it look more substantive and intentional.

Thanks again for the feedback. To answer some of the questions:

Vicki, yes, the french drain runs along the edge of the retaining wall. There are also three drains located throughout the bed at low grade points to collect additional water. Thanks for the ideas of the ferns--that's something I hadn't considered.

Catkim, the entire backyard is sloped.

Sammie, yeah, it is the "kidney shape", but I wanted it to encompass the two large oaks (where the erosion issues started) and the smaller redbed (uphill of the two trees) to keep my DH from getting it with the mower. So I don't know what I can do to alter the shape...I'm open to suggestions.

Courtskey, you've shown the correct orientation of the chairs, they'll be facing uphill towards the play areas. I liked the mockup and your solution of the shrubs behind.

Frankie, see above and Sammie and Ink, I've included the following picture to show some more of the area. It's all sloped and all shaded by oaks so and seating area I put back there will somehow include trees. Just to recap, this is how this area evolved: bad erosion, fix with french drain, incorporate that area so level it so have seating near where kids play.

{{gwi:23845}}

My first problem is proportion. It's a good-sized yard with lots (!) of big trees, but it's this dinky little bed and of all the spots to put chairs in this commodious yard, you're going to wedge them in there? Looks wierd to me. Not only is this a small spot for chairs, but also I'm not sure about the chairs in a flowerbed look.

And Sammie, I still like you and I have criticized Ink for being too cryptic in the past, but in this case I think he has said maybe almost enough to make the question pop, and it's the same as with the chairs: With all the space in this commodious and otherwise under-designed yard, why put a flowerbed there, and there only?

Having said that, perhaps you have a plan for the whole yard, and indeed how to handle this bed is a problem that needs help. My suggestion would be: you've got a woodland in that there yard, so plant the bed as if it were a woodland understory. Find another spot for the chairs.

Since the amateurs are posting, I'll be bold enough to comment, too. Are the chairs actually to be used, or are they a sort of lawn sculpture? Because if you place them as planned, your view will be the siding on the back of the house, the underside of the steps, and various chunks of expanded plastic in primary colors.

If you want something to see FROM the chairs, put them up by the steps, and do what karinl suggests, make a >suggestionThen you can sit in your classy chairs at the top, look through your woodland, past the ha-ha, out to the edges of your estate. And it takes just a quick turn of the head to the right to check on the kids.

Annie in Austin [it's fun to think about what you could do with a back yard that reaches more than 40 feet from back door to back fence. Sigh]

Thanks KarinL for your input. I have to say that I'm becoming more and more..don't even know the word, perplexed may be too strong. I certainly think that this bed needs something--I thought it was because it needed to be grounded, but now I'm questioning the entire backyard. As a lurker, I get to read a lot of your comments and I have a great deal of respect for many of your viewpoints.

The backyard is a little overwhelming for me. It's close to an acre. It's all sloped--not unuseable but certainly too much to place say, two adirondack chairs with out tipping over. Over half of it is wooded and this happens to be the part that has the the play area in it. No, Karin, unfortunately, I don't have a plan for the backyard. It's really just been a matter of a need arising and figuring out how to address it. The kids want a sandbox, we put it in. My husband wants a hammock, we put it up. We need to compost, we put in a huge compost area as far away from the house as possible and now... we have erosion, we fix it and try to put a seating area because I wanted a place to sit and enjoy the yard.

As far as where the chairs go, I wanted them in the bed because I don't want my DH to have to mow around them. BTW, I'm reading these responses to my husband and I think he's offended by the dinky little bed comment :) It's actually quite a large bed, but I understand your comment in regards to the rest of the yard. Which leads to the question... how do you place/size a bed when you're dealing with a yard like mine? No beds at all? One huge bed? Just don't know...

Well, I'm not a professional, but here's my take. Seeing the finished product in ones mind's eye is what the designer or design savvy person can bring to the mix. Looking at your initial photos, I immediately thought that a naturally weathered low, wood deck (kind of like a lake float, but bigger) might have been a better solution to your problem than the cement block wall and less impactful to tree roots than changing the grade everywhere. A second later, I thought about a whole series of wide, low decks spilling down the hillside--zigzagging--some with seating platforms around the perimeter and planting beds (one huge, continuous, undulating planting bed filled with woodland perennials) spilling out from under the edges of the decks. Is this what you want? Probably not, because I didn't even take time to ask you about your needs and desires for the space. Does it solve your drainage issues? No. Is it architecturally feasible? Who knows. Is it in budget? Who knows.

This is the first round of ideas. It might also be the final product, but the idea might go thru lots of iterations and emerge looking totally different. Generating the ideas is never frustrating for me because I immediately see tons of possibilities. Working within confines of reality is what brings frustration and doubt. Maybe if you asked yourself what you really want (if time, budget, etc. were no option) and you could see that clearly, then you could grab a chunk of the plan and develop that to completion. I think it is really hard to see or to develop a complete plan when you have already started with adhoc smaller projects like the hammock etc. You might have to put those out of your mind and to be OK with the idea of not utilizing those things so you can really see the most possibilities for the space. Now, I'm picturing that one deck might be devoted to the sandbox while another deck might be home to an arbor for the hammock.

You sleep on your idea. You draw it out on the ground to see if it will fit the space. You represent new trees and shrubs with sticks and string. Sometimes, the design holds up, sometimes it needs revision.

Well, that's my two cents.

Someone(s) mentioned planting behind where the chairs go. I think that if you don't, you won't feel comfortable in those chairs. Try it now with a kitchen chair. Having nothing behind you is uncomfortable. Having nothing behind you with a drop off is more uncomfortable. Having nothing behind you with a drop off behind you and an upslope in front of you is very unsettling.

It is not a disaster. This all becomes quite comfortable when you mitigate those effects. Planting behind the chairs with somethings of substance is the first major mitigation measure.

I agree with Laag's comment about needing a backdrop. How about planting some large shrubs BEHIND the retaining wall? That way you could put in some shrubs that will be large enough to have some substance and create a backdrop, without crowding the chairs. Around the chairs you can do groundcovers.

Gottagarden, that is a great idea because it will blend the wall with the slope below it. However one might have to use larger initial specimens or faster-growing ones to pick up the extra height needed.

I have got to say that this seems like a fairly simple deal if one doesn't get too hung up on all the other things that one might have done, but doesn't really have to do, to enjoy the yard. I am leaving the tree health issues alone for now because they either were addressed or will not be.

CHOICES! So one area was carved out for sitting. If you want to watch your kids, you will likely spend some time viewing plastic. Lauren, you're the one to decide where you sit to have the view you want for now.

I am not at all against the "big picture" posts--usually I dither there myself and don't get to specifics. But it seems like a beginning landscaping-person could start with an area like this and do some simple things to get out there and enjoy the yard and kids and continue to evolve the backyard concepts. So I am interested in helping Lauren see some of these other possibilities but not get paralyzed to the point where it seems like, "stop--don't sit there!!"

For example, it may be better for an ideal seating area to have "dry" footing as with flagstone. But maybe having decently-draining mulch underfoot (under-chair) is adequate now especially if the yard may evolve and this area might not be permanent seating. Plus it could be better for the trees.

And the size of the bed, or where it should be--if size alone is the issue, there is still room for Lauren to start small and expand later.

So, Lauren, because you are interested in some of these design issues, you may want to start a file of ideas and maybe start to doodle on paper about some of the "big picture" ideas for what your family wants to accomplish in and with the yard. In fact, getting out there and feeling comfortable sitting in a little spot will actually help stimulate ideas. I just think that it is fine for you to go ahead and utilize your current area, with some of the enclosure ideas, as part of the process.

Thanks to the rest of the posters...Yes! It's the backdrop issue. Thanks for restating that because that's what I initially felt was the problem, but I started to doubt it when other design issues were pointed out. I originally posted this because through all of my planning and thinking on this little seating/bed area, I had never once thought of the fact that when I placed two chairs there on a slightly raised bed with nothing behind it, that it would look so awkward. And since there are many posts/questions here from people about retaining walls-how-to, what to plant, etc. I wondered if any one else had been as surprised as I was to see that the there needs to be a backdrop or "gounding". I especially hadn't thought of the impact of the fact that (and laag pointed this out) the up slope in front of where the chairs were would accentuate the problem too.

So thanks for all of the thoughts and comments. I appreciate them (and certainly am not trying to shut down discussion if there is more on this topic, just wanted to let you all know I appreciate your time). This is my current plan...because playing out side time is already here. I think I'll plant some ferns along the edge right now--they won't infringe on the seating area. And I think I'll plan on placing some shurbs behind the wall to eventually give a more permanent backdrop. Any suggestions to actual shrubs is appreciated.

And frankie, I agree with you on the footing. I originally wanted a small patio there for the chairs, but because of concern for the trees, we opted for a mulch. As things get planted this summer and start to look different, I'll take some pictures for anyone who might be interested. This is simply my starting point and I'm sure it will change/mutate in the future.

lauren,

It's not as bad as you think. The workmanship looks fine. If there seems to be something a tad wrong .... well maybe there is.

The question you bring to us is about design. I would guess that you started this project without first developing a base map or site plan of the entire area of your lot.

The result is a nice project out of scale. If your backyard was a 50 by 50 square this would look great. As is, the effect is like a single plant stuck in sea of lawn.

Based on the photos, my guess is that you now have something like this .....

{{gwi:23846}}

Do you see the scope of your project as a part of the overall backyard? Too small. Fix it with phase II. Do an accurate, to scale base map to guide your design. The fix might be another wall cut back into the slope to make a bigger flat, with the chairs moved away from the wall drop and the area expanded with shurbs and understory trees. Maybe something like this ....

{{gwi:23847}}

Good design begins with the base map. Only then will you know what is possible and what will work.

One of our local gardening gurus, Ann Lovejoy, wrote a book called "Gardening from Scratch". It's ideal starter material--she goes thru all the steps of taking inventory of your space and asking yourself how you want to use the space and prioritizing your anwsers to achieve the best result and to utilize the budget most effectively. It's written in a conversational tone and can be read for enjoyment as well as information. I'd completely recommend it!

Hi, Lauren,

Pls8sxx offers a part of exactly what I would have suggested: enlarging the flat area & adding steps down to it to give it better proportion with the large yard. Then in the future, you could consider expanding the flat in nice shape over to the hammock area, one step down--essentially a type of informal terracing.

As for plants, I don't know how they do in your zone, but I could sure see a mix of some large lacecap and mophead hydrangeas behind the flat for your background, but there would need to be some taller shrubs back by the fence to form a background for them, or you'd have the fence top peeking out from behind the hydrangeas & that would look odd.

Karen

P.S. I've had the same reactions as every other poster, from wishing you had a "big picture" design for the whole yard to "do what you can while you can". Good luck.

Aside from the grounding challenge landscape posed in this thread, I have a couple of other observations - mostly about human nature and personal perspective:

1) Start small vs. have a master plan.

When people with new properties start threads titled -- "HELP!!!! Blank Sate! Where do I start with my one acre of land?!?!?!?!" -- they are often told to step back and work on one section at a time. In the Going Lawnless thread, there were plenty of comments about starting small by removing just some turf, and expanding from there over time. Seems to me that is what you are doing, Lauren. You are starting section by section in your yard.

Yes, an overall vision for your backyard is important too, but it sort of seems like you may already have one, even though you haven't fully articulated it, put it on paper, or fleshed out the details: You plan on keeping a wooded lot; you need to control water flow and drainage (already addressed); you need play equipment and turf for active children; you enjoy the vistas and family time from your two decks; hubby needs space to relax in the woods; and you have times when you want to sit near your children. You have defined your needs/functions already, and you already have a start at addressing them.

2. Many posters approach questions from their own personal biases.

Thus, a person without small children may think you should sit up near your house and face the woodlands, which you probably do already from your house windows and decks. Someone else may think the garden bed is dinky, but it actually looks good sized to me. Yet another person doesn't like looking at plastic (but at the rate kids grow, why spend more $$$$, eh?). And someone else may be reminded of tree rings or detests kidney shaped beds. Personal biases makes a big difference in the way one views a project.

Personally, I would not want to sit out there, but the thing is, I may have wanted to do so 10 years ago when my children also had Tyco play structures. My guess is that over time, your landscaping needs (functional needs) will change too. The Adirondack chairs will be used now, but I wouldn't be surprised if in 10 years when your kids are asking for the car keys rather than Leggos, those chairs will cease to be used and you may want to do something else with that space.

I perceive, from the first picture, the tree organization in the center of the design area as a space in itself, defined by the trees themselves--a 'sacred space' if you will. Thus, you might consider capitalizing on the enclosure of the sacred space zone by massing a few varieties of natives to flank it, and larger natives to back it, while leaving maybe two or three points of seperation on the sides and rear to act as fenestrations to bring in the beautiful prospect vies to the rear of the area. I stress natives because, judging from the existing background, decorative cultivars would appear out of context and displaced--an island of decoration as opposed to an enclave of serenity (verbosity, I know). Anyway, think about the circle of space in the four major trees and define that space--stones for paving, creeping things and mosses, plants on the perifery that difuse the shape, and a corral of native materials. The choices should be minimized for maximum effect, and I would steer clear of the desire to completely shape the design area's perimeter--let it flow out in airborne tendrils for a horizontal contrast to the verticality of the prominent tree trunks. Good luck.

I live near the MO/KS line (work in mo, live in ks -- work at a nursery)....

I like your bed, and I think its always fun to have a new project to work with.

I like how you solved your drainage problem.. Alot of ppl might not realize that we have some pretty major downpours here, especially in the spring, if you have a low spot in your yard and neighbors yards draining into yours as well, you were bound to have some nice ruts eroded into the middle of the yard.

What I would do is:

Face the chairs back towards the house...

Plant some flowering shrubs up next to the fence directly behind that bed.. (azaleas, rhododendrons..but I would use some with brighter colors, maybe a white and fuschia mixture) that is your backdrop. that also leaves the back part of the bed behind the chairs open for something smaller (ferns, maybe, or some hostas, columbines... maybe a mixture of all) for differing textures and colors from the shrubs behind them..

In the front, I think you could get away with some sunnier loving plants.. at the very corners (edges?) where the bricks just start, I would plant something that will eventually creep over the wall... dianthus will do that (firewitch is a good one for our area/zone) there are several evergreen kinds. Creeping phlox would be another alternative. and if you are a dedicated enough gardener, deadheading the dianthus will keep them blooming year round.

towards the front sides of the bed, there is room for some spring blooming bulbs and you could plant other things to come up after the bulbs are done blooming. I suggest some blue veronica and maybe some culver's root towards the front (sides) of the bed. You might want to find a couple of evergreen smaller shrubs and put in there.. I would try a soft touch holly, which makes a cute little rounded mound about 3x3. Or you could put a pokomoke (not sure if I spelled it right) crape myrtle. Then I would put 1 or two gold mound spireas in there for some bright color. Just make sure to keep the gold mounds trimmed up and kept pretty small.

I would also put some flat stones (stepping stones) to get to your chairs and I would think you might need a stone pad to set your chairs on to keep them from sinking down into the dirt. Some cedar mulch (the plain kind) in the whole bed would tidy it up...

Vicki, you are right about the personal bias thing - my four kids are long past the Tyco stage so I was not empathizing enough with Lauren's needs as a mother in 2006.
Have to work on that!

Annie

Lauren, I apologize for the dinky little bed comment. Vicki is quite right that there is nothing wrong with working on one small piece of landscaping at a time, and the first one is bound to look smaller; if you do more beds later or some more decking/patio work, this bed will fit admirably. I think what put me off was that you were trying to cram all the functions of patio and flowerbed into the one space, and with so much space around it seemed illogical to me to put the chairs in the bed and not on some of that expansive grass, given that such chairs can be relatively easily moved for mowing (relative to, say, a concrete bench). But of course, they can also be moved with the next landscape project, so I really could have kept my mouth shut.

Seems to me that the problem has been as much defined as solved through this thread; an interesting outcome. I do envy you having time to sit and watch your kids play :-). Mine always had to entertain themselves while I was busy gardening, as I always had more garden than I really had time for. All the better to leave it for later.

Karin, please don't apologize for the dinky little bed comment. I certainly wasn't offended--more amused by the fact that my husband was offended--I think it's something about men thinking that any project they were involved in was not "big enough". It made me smile. And I agree that this discussion has helped me understand the problem and issues much better than before. I also appreciate all the additional thoughts on this project from everyone.

Just a little update in the last couple of days, I've planted (in addition to the small hostas that were already in the bed around the redtwig dogwoods) some ferns, lobelia, columbine, and 1 bleeding heart I managed to wrangle from a friend's garden. I was looking for a woodland theme initially, but the additionaly suggestions to go that route from some of you all, got me moving. I've also laid out some stepping stones going to the "sitting area" between the two large trees. I've outlined it on both sides with some lamium orchid frost (kind of has silvery leaves with lavender flowers). Hopefully that won't look too out of place but I wanted something to kind of lead into the chairs. And as I speak--sorry type-- this my DH is finishing the last of the 2 adirondack chairs. I just need to paint them.

Also, autumnmoon, you're a new name for me to see here, thanks for the thoughts. I'm actually on the otherside of the state from you, but used to live in KC and have to say the worst storm I've ever been in was in KC-only time weather has ever scared me. And the french drain was fun, thanks for the compliment. That's an aspect of landscaping I feel comfortable with, the plant selection and design is another story.

Thanks again for everyone's thoughts, advice, and encouragement. As the plants mature this growing season, I'll take an update picture so you all can see what your ideas and input have manifested into :)

I think you need some woodland understory shrubs or small trees behind the chairs and to help anchor the trees to the low perennials and groundcovers. I don't mean in a clipped hedge or row or anything formal but informally placed such as in a woodland.

I don't know what grows in your zone but Dogwoods, Japanese Maples, Rhododendrons, Deciduous Azaleas, Mountain Laurel come to mind.

A nice shrubby tree to plant by the retaining wall would be Amelanchier/Serviceberry. Some of them have passibly good tasting berries, tolerate shade, nice form, passable autumn color, white flowers in spring. They are not messy because birds gobble up all the berries. So that's another kind of nice thing about Amelanchier, it attracts birds to your yard to enjoy watching. It also tolerates wet soil. Another possibility for big shrubs are witch hazel and spicebush, although they will take a while to reach large size. Both are very pretty but not show stoppers like rhodies. Myself, I'm partial to mountain laurel, Kalmia lafifolia, but that's because I'm named after that plant.