A redbud or dogwood or franklinia might fill the bill. Instead of structured plants in the bed why not some groundcover type woody plants, like cotoneaster or euonymous or potentilla, since there are so many straight lines in the house and bed shape and you don't want them hiding the porch. Gotta soothe all the lines. The simpliest is the most pleasing to the eye.

Try a dwarf conifer, as your bed is only 7 feet from the eaves.

"A redbud or dogwood or franklinia might fill the bill. Instead of structured plants in the bed why not some groundcover type woody plants, like cotoneaster or euonymous or potentilla, since there are so many straight lines in the house and bed shape and you don't want them hiding the porch. Gotta soothe all the lines. The simpliest is the most pleasing to the eye."

We actually were just taking the suggestion from the guy at the nursery...he said with the height of the house it would probably be best to add a tree with some height on that side of the house? Of course, I am always interested to hear difference of opinions before making any final decisions...thanks for your input...I really appreciate it.

I looked at that redbud tree and that looks pretty nice to me but will have to get final approval from the wife.

"Try a dwarf conifer, as your bed is only 7 feet from the eaves."

I looked that up and that does not look to bad...not sure if we are looking for an evergreen at this point but good suggestion....Thanks

The problem is that it will be difficult to grow a tree with the right height and mass for the house in that little pollywog bed extension.

If you're up for it, try taking a breather and step back from the shape of the bed you created, and into which you are now trying to fit plants and at the same time accomplish other landscape design goals, and see instead what trees or plants should be planted to create the right landscape, and then plant them wherever they need to be and create the proper planting area for them.

An ongoing previous thread, :help with existing bed and shape" discusses a lot of issues relevant to your questions.

"The problem is that it will be difficult to grow a tree with the right height and mass for the house in that little pollywog bed extension.

If you're up for it, try taking a breather and step back from the shape of the bed you created, and into which you are now trying to fit plants and at the same time accomplish other landscape design goals, and see instead what trees or plants should be planted to create the right landscape, and then plant them wherever they need to be and create the proper planting area for them.

An ongoing previous thread, :help with existing bed and shape" discusses a lot of issues relevant to your questions."

In reference to your first reponse, I guess that is why the guy at the nursury was saying the space is going to be difficult to fill due to the space constrictions. But I was hoping there would be something out there that we could do to fill in the space.

I understand about what your saying in the second part about stepping away and seeing what fits in there and then create a space around it. But to be honest, we are happy with the circle area and do not really want to do anymore re-work to create a "better" space. I think I will really strongly consider any smaller tree suggestions that were posted earlier to fill it in instead of re-thinking the shape of the bed...but thanks for your helpful insight, I really appreciate it:)

After reading some of these posts, (and even before posting my question)..my wife and I wondered if we could possibly plant a dogwood tree in this spot? Anyone know if they make a miniature version of a dogwood if such a thing? Maybe something that we can either trim, without hurting it to much, or something that would only get 8-12 feet? Not sure if I have a case of wishful thinking or what but just trying to make this as easy a possible..LOL
Thanks,
Michael

As a person who has done leaves and eaves to the max, I am going to play bad guy here with the voice of experience and say that I really do think you and your wife are doing way too much wishful thinking, on a couple of levels.

To put a tree there that will overhang your roof is just a make-work and possibly make-damage move. You can indeed prune it away from the roof, but there is this thing called wind that will have you on a ladder cleaning those eaves way more than is good for your health. (Trees also provide ladders for spiders to get in upstairs windows). Also, anything that is overhanging your roof (or wants to) is also going to be under-growing your foundation with its roots.

If you MUST plant a tree there stick with something columnar or strictly weeping so that you minimize the canopy problem - columnar beeches and maples come to mind but they get huge and make big root trouble; there are Japanese maples that would probably fit the bill best in terms of root safety but they aren't as narrow. Maybe one of the dark weeping beeches or narrow weeping conifers. But even evergreens constantly shed foliage.

What seems to be keeping you in wishful-thinking land is that you are trying, as Frankie said, to meet too many objectives with this little circular bed. I think the problem may be that you equate "landscaping" to "foundation planting" so that the only place you can think of to plant a tree is right there in the space that you have. But the property looks fairly spacious, enough to go at least another ten feet away for a tree site. Put a nice rhododendron or cotoneaster or something in your circle, and then put a dogwood or redbud away from the house where you won't have to curtail the very features that make them beautiful to keep them within bounds.

If you want some input that addresses the property as a whole, you could always post some more pictures that give the big picture. To do that, by the way, you can always just link here to a photo you've posted on the gallery side (I admit I never look there) or open a photobucket account and paste the HTML code from your picture there into the body of the message here. The photo should show when you preview your message. Also... avoid one of my pet peeves: stay with the current thread, don't start a new one to post new information, so that the feedback you already have is here for our reference.

Sounds like you both want to have a dogwood - I hope you can find a better space to plant it.

KarinL

Try doing some web searches for cultivars that meet your desired sizes and shapes. You can also scroll through some nursery catalogs (Forest Farm, etc) for same as often the mature size, whether columnar or spreading, is listed. For suggestions on things to plant in a specific spot, you can also post on the Tree or Shrub forum.

If you want a dogwood, measure out where it should be placed.

The difference between there, and that preordered space is the difference between you and happiness....

Here are a few recommendations to work with your existing bed: Decididuous small trees(some may have to be maintained but these recommendations are smaller or narrow species): Magnolia 'Jane', Styrax(japanese Snowbell), Carpinus fastigita(upright European Hornbeam), Amalanchier canadensis(Serviceberry), Cotinus(Smoke Tree), Prunus 'Okame'(Flowering Cherry), Vitex(Chaste Tree), Stewartia psuedocamellia(japanese Stewartia). Deciduous medium/large sized shrubs(light shape pruning needed): Viburnum, Aronia (Red Chokeberry), Prunus cistena (Sand Cherry), Syringa(Lilac), Callicarpa(Beautyberry), Corylus 'Contorta'(walking stick). Evergreen medium sized shrubs: Ilex 'San Jose'(San Jose Holly), Prunus 'Schipkaensis'(Skip Laurel), Pieris(Andromeda). All of the above will work with little maintenance and act as the anchor plant for the bed. If using a tree, place liriope or perennials(salvia, sedum, coreopsis, lavender) around the base to enhance the effect. If you like trees that have a wider spread they will do much better away from the house in their own bed as someone else suggested. Hope this helps a bit.

Your nurseryperson is quite astute and has given you some very good advice. One of the most common mistakes homeowners make is planting a tree or shrub that gets too large too close to the house. Eventually, it becomes a maintenance nightmare, requiring frequent and often disfiguring pruning, clogging up gutters and potentially damaging the roof and eaves, blocking access to the siding and just generally looking out of place and getting in the way, often when it comes to mowing. It is the classic "right plant, right place" principle totally ignored or converted to "wrong plant, wrong place".

Do the math yourself and see what makes sense........unless you plant your tree/shrub selection right at the bed edge, you only have about 4-5' width to deal with before it starts encroaching on the house/porch, more likely less. That means a tree or shrub with a maximum spread of about 8-10 feet. And you have already determined that you want a height of about the same - 10-12'. That narrows down your choices significantly. For one, unless dwarf selections, few "trees" will remain under 15' and most will develop spreads or canopies in excess of your available space. Pruning constantly to maintain size is not a great idea, a lot of work and many species resent it. Plus, unless you know what you're doing, you usually wind up with a butchered tree or shrub that looks terrible.

Under these very narrow circumstances, the crape myrtle (a relatively small tree or large shrub with a vase shape) or a dwarf conifer seem most suited. Or if care is taken to select an appropriate cultivar, possibly a Japanses maple with a similar vase-shaped growth habit. The advantage of the conifer is that various narrow or columnar forms can be obtained that will provide the desired height without overwhelming the tiny planting area.

And I'd have to disagree with virtually all the plant suggestions made in the previous post. Without exception, the trees will easily exceed both height and width requirements, and many of the shrubs as well.

I am curious as to why you would seek landscaping advice and yet be so closed to suggestions to enlarge or change the shape of the existing planting bed. In my mind, it's pretty much a no-brainer. The bed is too small to comfortably accommodate anything that will provide significant size and scale. Moreover, the shape is contrived and looks awkward and an afterthought. The convention is to plan out the plantings to accent and enhance the home and size the beds accordingly, not the other way around. I wouldn't hesitate to increase the size of this planting area - a lot. It will only improve its appearance and versatility as well as widen your plant choices considerably.

Thanks to all of you that have responded in the last couple of days. I just wanted to comment, I apologize if I come off as being "closed minded" to suggestions on to enlarging or changing the shape of the existing planting bed. We actually like the size and shape of what we have created and were just hoping that there would be something that will work there. From some of the suggestions we have received on here, we are leaning towards a dwarf conifer. I went to a website called mountain meadows and saw a pic of one that was tall and slender that would really look nice in that spot...(unfortunately I do not know the specific name). From the reading that I have done on this specific plant types, it appears they do get as tall as their regular counterparts but just takes them a lot of years to do so. So for example if I bought a 6-8 foot plant, it might only grow 1 to 2 feet in twenty years! That seems great, especially if you are able to trim the top of it after several years have passed and not do any damage, which I would imagine you could?

Anyway, if anyone has any suggestions as to the type of dwarf conifer I am referencing, please provide a name so I can look it up to seem if it matches. Thanks, I am still open to suggestions for plant types if any are still out there.

Michael

One of the narrowest conifers, chamaecyparis nootkatensis Van den Akker:
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=chamaecyparis%20van%20den%20akker&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

Some good narrow selections in this thread, with names, including PIcea engelmanii Bush's Lace and Gold Cone juniper:
http://forums.gardenweb.com/forums/load/conif/msg0517503928354.html

A nice weeping conifer, Picea abies Frohburg:
http://www.richsfoxwillowpines.com/Web%20Albums/Foxwillow%20Pines%20Photos%20Picea/slides/Picea%20abies%20Frohburg.html

The conifers forum (the second link above) may be able to make other suggestions, as well as to suggest nurseries in your area where you are most likely to find them - though you can also mail order, for example from the third link above. Or sometimes nurseries will special order things for you.

The rate of growth you mention is pretty darn slow and I'm not sure any of these comply (really slow growth is more typical of the bushy, wider dwarf conifers) but they are certainly moderate growers. And you do have upward room in any case, so I would see no reason to top the tree, which is usually not good for it anyway and usually just results in the tree putting up alternate leaders which makes it crookeder in the end but not necessarily any shorter.

KarinL

You never want to top or "trim the top off" a single leader conifer (or any other tree for that matter). As Karin suggests, it seriously alters plant appearance and growth habit and often provides inroads to dieases and insect problems. It is generally considered to shorten the life of a tree, often substantially.

Some nice choices provided - Picea omorika 'Bruns Pendula', Thuja orientalis 'De Groot's Spire', and various selections of Lawson or Hinoki cypress could work well also. Search out a better nursery/garden center in your area that offers a good conifer selection and see what they have on hand now or what might be available in spring. (Late fall is the premier conifer selection and planting season here in the PNW but that's not necessarily the same everywhere). I'd even consider going back to the crape myrtle recommendation place - good advice should be rewarded by continued patronage :-))

Thanks for the info, even though these conifers are slow growers, I would imagine they may get to the point where they would get to high, from a visual aspect.

I was not aware that "topping" off or trimming the tops of these trees to keep them at a pre-planned height (once they get to the height we would need which is probably no more than 10 feet or so) would be so detrimental?

Thanks,
Michael

Just do a Google search under "topping trees" - there is literally a million hits, most of which outline why this practice is detrimental both to the health of the tree and to its appearance. It is just not recommended, ever.

Gardengal48-

Thanks for the info, I will certainly google topping trees and read up on that. The only reason I made that comment is because my father in law has a few rows of leelands and once or twice a year he tops them off becse he only wants them to be a certain height. No ill effects so far but I guess time will tell. Thanks for educating me on this subject.

Michael

Michael - I can understand your confusion :-) Leyland cypress, much like your common arborvitae, tend not to develop a single, defined leader or at least do not do so until they have achieved some maturity and some height. In this respect, they are much more shrub-like than tree-like and are often sheared to maintain a tidy hedge. There is risk that is shared by other topped trees if they are allowed to grow too tall before the shearing/topping begins or if there is significant time between "haircuts". It should be understood that routine hedging of trees/shrubs like the Leylands or arborvitae is significantly different than topping. Not all that many different conifers (or other, deciduous trees for that matter) will accept this type of treatment

This is the pic I was referencing earlier. I kind of like the tree all the way to the left, tall skinny one, what do you guys think? Not sure of the name but after possibly getting the go ahead I will post in another section to see if I can get some assistance on what type of conifer this is.

We are planning on going to a nursury or two this weekend so I would kind of like to get a plan as to what exactly I should ask to see in person. I know over the last several days there have been a lot of replies w/suggestions followed by more that say what was suggested above will not work or my situation. So, at this point, I am still just a little confused. You guys/gals have been really great about helping me out and I really appreciate it.

Thanks, (btw, sorry for the links for the pics, but I cannot figure out for the life of me how to get the image to show up)

Michael

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3191/2947538422_00cf85fe68.jpg

From a distance, looks very much like American arborvitae, Thuja occidentalis (not orientalis like I mistyped previously :-)) Lots of different choices of these but 'Smaragd' (aka 'Emerald' or 'Emerald Green') or 'DeGroot's Spire' will stay quite narrow and within height requirements.

But there's a bunch more narrow conifers that could work. Ask to see anything very columnar that wont grow enormously tall but be sure to check for mature spread - some narrow conifers develop " middle-age midriff spread" as they age :-))

I think it looks more like a juniper - Juniperus communis, perhaps Pencil Point or Arnold. A green version of the Gold Cone shown in the conifers forum thread I cited above. If you really want to know, ask in the conifers forum.

Thuja DeGroot's Spire is, however, also a lovely plant if you can get one. It will stay a bit narrower than this one, I think. This juniper is something that could probably be topped like a hedge plant if it got taller than you want.

I personally think that if you are going to be sitting on that porch at all, the juniper is not as nice close-up as a Chamaecyparis or Thuja. And in the long run, this columnar shape will be wider at eye level than a weeping plant will be. This may be something you want, so I present the point without prejudice.

Do ask what your nurseries have in stock. They are in business selecting material for your local climate for a reason, and getting something that will remain healthy should be of primary concern.

Your confusion at the variety of replies here is understandable, as there is no one right answer and none of us needs any qualifications to post here, so there is bad advice sometimes. But generally, if someone disagrees with a previous poster, they give a reason, and you will be able to decide whether that reason resonates with you.

KarinL

There are some very narrow weeping conifers that are interesting to look at and would work. Columnar boxwood is cool and different.

Honestly, the first thing I thought when I saw the bed was "Tree, THERE???" and the second thing was "crape myrtle." I do like the idea of having a shrub there and putting a tree better suited to the size of your house farther out.

other ideas:

[IMG]http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk80/landscapedesignchina/16.jpg[/IMG]

why cant see pic?try again:

{{gwi:51811}}

here link maybe useful:
groups.myspace.com/gardenideas

Columnar boxwood... haven't seen that, but the idea reminds me of one of the non-prickly hollies, Ilex crenata Mariesii. Mine is about 5 feet high after some ten years in the ground, and very narrow. Has the coolest foliage from up close and great form from a distance.

KarinL

Hey all, thanks for the replies over the weekend...just thought I would update you on my adventure to the nursury this weekend.

The guy at this nursury gave me two options, one a spiral juniper, he said would stay the height it was currently at (which was about 6-8 feet roughly, high price tag). But after doing some research online, someone posted on this forum that her plant grew to 15ft? I also read that you can top them off without doing any damage to the plant as long as you get the spiral tip looking correctly.

Anyway, the second option was a evergreen arbor vitae? But he said that would get up to 15ft or so and that would be to tall for the area. I inquired whether I could top off to keep at certain height and he said he would not do that better to let them grow. I kind of confused about the evergreen arbor vitae, because I remember going to a different nursury last year and saw some of these there and I could have swore the tag said the height would only be 6-8 feet?

Anyway, we like the looks of the spiral junipter but the price tag primarly has me concerned ($200) and the upkeep as well..even though he said you only had to trim a few times a year....?

Thanks,
Michael

Most evergreens grow throughout their lifespans. The size given by nurseries is typically a 10-year height or a "slow down" height. For an accent plant, an arb would be almost as dull as you could get there. And the topiary would be out of style with the house. They're almost as bad as a dwarf Alberta spruce....

There's Picea abies 'Pendula' and Cedrus atlantica 'Glauca Pendula' that would be enormously more interesting there. Juniperus rigida 'Pendula' could be cool, too. Or Larix decidua 'Pendula'.

Alternatively, there's the columnar boxwood and Sky Pencil holly, which have both been mentioned.

Heck. Plant a smoke tree. An althea. A ninebark. There are GREAT uses for arbs--I've got six in my yard I'm growing to form a very (deliberately) boring backdrop wall/screen--but that's not one of them.

I agree with many of the previous responses - the worst thing you could do would be to plant anything too close to the house. I understand all too well the temptation to make the tree relate to the house but heed the advice you've been given here! :-)

The second photo you posted looks like a mature skyrocket juniper. You mentioned the nurseryman suggesting a spiral juniper; anything trimmed and trained into a spiral is going to be $$$ and not just that, it has an edward scissorhands-type whimsy to it that may or may not be appropriate based on the style of your home and your neighborhood.

You need to decide whether you want something that's evergreen or deciduous - depends on yoru zone, yada yada. The goal is to anchor the house but not over- or underwhelm it.

I would say if you're reluctant to enlarge the bed, definitely stick with something columnar/narrow. Pretty much any arborvitae is going to get too tall and wide. A skyrocket juniper could work but IMO considering the color of your house, the contrast of a dark evergreen would be more striking. In my neighborhood (new development) nellie r stevens holles are commonly used to anchor new homes but i think in time they will grow too large. In your case a foster holly or an oakleaf holly, both of which have more columnar growth habits, may work.

Sorry I cannot be of more help; that's just my 2 cents. :-)

{{gwi:51812}}

{{gwi:51813}}

{{gwi:51814}}

{{gwi:51815}}

other some pic link here:

groups.myspace.com/gardenideas

Somebody shoot me.

Anyway, I think your narrow juniper in the picture is an Irish Juniper ( a cultivar of communis as someone mentioned above).

As my ancestors' may have said "don't buy a shoe and then make your foot fit it". Make the bed fit the plant, not the other way around in this case.

Somebody shoot me.

LOL!! That's about the funniest thing I've seen on this forum in months :-) And refers to a very clear example why photoshopping or using computer graphics without a clear understanding of design principles - like scale/proportion - or plant details is a huge waste of time. Give it up, ideasshare - you are not helping!!

Some height would be nice, but columnar evergreens can be extraordinarily boring. Perhaps consider a "patio tree" or what are typically shrubs commonly grown as tree-form standards: Hydrangea paniculata, rose of Sharon, ribes, ninebark, dwarf Korean lilac, cranberry cotoneaster or dwarf crabapples like 'Firebird' or 'Lollipop'. Or something really unusual like a 'Twisty Babe' contorted dwarf locust. That one has a lot of great winter interest as well.

Two options and $200? Find another nursery.

KarinL

Could those be the feet of my sister-in-law?

{{gwi:51816}}

gardengal48-

Thanks for all your help. I looked up the varieties that you suggested above and showed my wife. We both agree that we like the "rose of sharon" and the "dwarf Korean lilac". Probably like the rose of sharon just a little better but would be happy with either. I saw that the lilac is a slow grower and I would want something that would grow at a decent pace not sure if the rose of sharon will or not. Anyway, we like the blooms a little better on the rose of sharon and would like to find out where we might get one. Should I just call around to some nurseries to see if they have one or can order one for me? Or should I just try to look for it online and have it shipped? Not sure what I should do? And, if I am able to find one, is it ok to plant it this time of year or should I just wait until spring?

Thanks,
Michael

Michael - I assume the DE indicates you are in Delaware and therefore most likely a zone 7. If so there's still plenty of time for planting. Personally, I'd look for the plants at local retail nurseries or garden centers - you will get larger, more mature plants for your money than you would if ordering online plus no shipping expense (altho gas in this day and age may add up to the same!) And I would not be surprised if these tree-form plants were a little scarce at this time of year - you may have better luck in spring or can ask the nursery to order one for you for that time. Also, because there is time and training involved in creating these "patio trees", they tend to be quite a bit more expensive than the similar plant in a straight shrub form. You've already encountered a similar situation with the spiral junipers - that topiary treatment to get them to spiral takes time and hands-on attention. And that equals big bucks! Or at least bigger bucks :-)

Something you may want to keep in mind about Rose of Sharon is that it leafs out fairly late in the spring. It can be a deal breaker for some people in a prominent location.

gardengal48-

Thanks for the info...I will check into that:)

mad gallica-

So if I am understanding correctly, this means it will be bare (just a bunch of sticks basically) until late spring when leaves start appearing again? If that is indeed the case I may have to do some addtl thinking about that. Just my luck, get something that will work and that we are excited about putting in and there is always a catch..LOL

Yes, that is exactly what it does. Everything else is growing, the bulbs are blooming, and the hibiscus just sits there looking dead. In a corner of the backyard it's not a big deal, but in front ....

At least the hibiscus has a fairly nice branch structure and light bark... Lilacs are (in my opinion) profoundly unattractive-looking plants both bare and leafed-out. But both are basically green blobs with not too interesting foliage for most of the year, having nothing to recommend them but their flowers, which in the lilac's case are very fleeting. Although I am remembering that Gardengal has suggested the patio tree versions, which may have nicer form.

But for my money, both these plants are background plants, not specimen plants.

I still think that a good choice would be a weeping tree, for it is interesting up close and narrow up top where you might want to see past it. I think that of all the things we've mentioned, the purple weeping beech remains worth considering - I think one cultivar is Purple Fountain, and a slower-growing, darker one, Black Swan.

The other plants that are catching your interest would do much to enhance the rest of your property, but wouldn't look too good in this spot.

Researching plants online is risky because no one ever photographs them in their off-season. Going to the nursery only shows you one season too, unless you visit often, but at least you can compare lots of different plants at that point in the year. Visit lots of nurseries if you can.

Perhaps you need to review your requirements for this plant - when do you want it to look particularly nice, how much debris can you accommodate and when, do you want deciduous or evergreen, do you want up-close or distance interest? It is really hard to make a recommendation with nothing but the spot to go on - your expectations and wishes are what will make the decision.
It also matters whether you will be planting up the rest of the property, because if your heart is set on a hibiscus and you can't put it anywhere else, I'd be the last person to say you shouldn't put it here. So much depends on what's important to you.

KarinL

KarinL-

I am interested in a weeping tree as you suggested but really can't find any good pics online of what a Purple Weeping Beach, purple fountain, or black swan actually look like. We also like those umbrella looking / ornamental type trees that some people have included in their front landscape. Also to answer some of your questions: I do not really care about debris, I do not really care if it's deciduous or evergreen (as long as it looks good for the front of the house:), and the distance question...I don't think we prefer one way or another it can look pretty good from a distance and pretty good up close....not trying to ask for a lot. Again, just want it to be presentable and for it not to look out of place for a front of the house tree/shrub/etc.

Yes, we will be planting up the rest of the property...eventually. We would like to buy a shade tree (maple or something) for the front yard in the spring. So my heart is not definitely set on anything at this point. I just want some options that will work in my current situation and I will be glad to pick from those.

I must say thanks to all of you that are continually giving your assistance....yes I am a major rookie at this thing and I probably come off as unappreciative because I do not want to rearrange the flower bed but really I am not. I just wanted to get some options from people that definitely know what they are doing so I do not make a mistake that I will regret in a few years....LOL

Thanks,
Michael

Michael, I think it is good that you are firm in stating what you want in terms of the bed, since it would not achieve anyone's objectives to pretend otherwise. It is also nice that you are responding to the feedback you're getting as that allows people to refine their advice.

But I have a sense that you are in a bit of a decision-making limbo, though, and I think three things are holding you back.

One is an apparent lack of local nurseries that offer you really good variety. Sourcing what you want is an art in itself, and it can be easier to just cruise all your nurseries and choose from what they have rather than choosing from the entire wealth of the plant kingdom as presented by the internet. On the other hand, there are some great mail-order nurseries, and if you do have wishes that can't be met locally, you should feel free to take advantage of them. But you can't beat local nursery visits for getting to know plants up close and personal, and learning what is likely to work well in your area.

Another is that you keep being attracted to plants that just aren't suitable for the spot, such as those umbrella-looking trees (probably weeping birches, cherries, or similar) which are indeed nice but in this spot will be one of those mistakes that you will regret in a few years. I think this reflects that your objectives for the space are not quite clear enough yet - focus on what overall plant shape you want first and foremost, and what constraints really matter (eg you can push the boundaries on height, but not on width). Or it could mean that you're readier to work on the property as a whole than you think! It is generally advisable to have an overall plan before making big decisions, but as long as this spot will remain in about the same amount of sun it now has, you can go ahead and make a decision for it. Maybe it would be good to keep a list of the other plants that are appealing to you for the later design process.

Finally, I think you are making the stakes pretty high by feeling you have to make the right decision that will work for all time. With plants, all decisions are reversible, and there is nothing wrong with working with a temporary timeline. That's one reason I always buy my plants small and let them grow, since I don't want a $200 investment that I will be hesitant to change my mind about (not to mention that plants have been known to die!!!). So let yourself pick something you like that might grow too tall, or even too wide for that matter, since you can always take it out, move it, and try something different. You might be ready for a change in ten years anyway.

I've linked below to a nursery that has an amazing website, offering several view for each plant and which is very easy to navigate (go to the plants section, obviously). It is apparently a wholesale nursery ($3500 minimum order!) so you might not order from them (maybe your local nursery would...) but the site might facilitate your decision-making. They do have a good picture of the purple fountain beech, among others. Also check through their selection of Japanese maples whether they have any nice upright-growing varieties.

KarinL

Here is a link that might be useful: awesome website of wholesale (?) tree nursery

How big is the front yard? My guess is that a maple will end up providing a fair amount of shade to this spot. Depending on exactly where it goes, how big it is when planted, etc. that may happen in as little as ten years. Potentially large trees are one of the things that people tend to plan early, because they have such large effects on what comes later. It's also probable that the design need for something tall will be satisfied by this maple.

Assuming you are in Delaware, it isn't that big a place, and tends to be close to SE Pennsylvania and southern NJ. There are several places around Philadelphia worth of a horticultural field trip. I'll start with Longwood and the Morris Arboretum, however there are a lot of smaller places. Sometimes it seems there is something plant related lurking around every corner.

In southern NJ, there is a place called Fairweather Nursery. It's in the middle of nowhere, not too far from the NJ Turnpike bridge into Del. They have occasional open houses during the spring.

At this point, unless you are in a fairly sophisticated horticultural area, things are probably winding down for winter more than a little bit. This is the time of year for jumping on half price plants that you've been drooling over all summer, but weren't willing to pay full price for. It isn't a time to try for a lot of variety.