I would suggest that this forum could maybe suggest a couple of general principles from which you could develop your own plan, but it's true that you need to be willing to get yourself up a learning curve about both gardening and landscaping to make this work. To tell the truth though, if you don't do the learning curve pretty much all the plants you buy and even professional advice will be a bit if a waste of money, because plants need to be maintained to be of any aesthetic use. The safest thing to do if you don't want to get too involved is just to have all grass!! I think, first, I would put nothing that the dog walkers can destroy by the street. A lot of novices are inclined to cling to the perimeter of the lawn when planting, and that is usually a mistake - by the driveway, plants interfere with getting in and out, and by the street, plants are subject to dog abuse and road salt. Grass is the best plant for those areas. You don't have to have beds anywhere, not even at the house, but if you want some, then I would suggest nice deep beds at the house and maybe another bed within the lawn somewhere. If you outline the bed with a row of flat bricks, it will be easy to mow around, although the edge will always require some maintenance. A key question is always "what do you want to accomplish?" If it is just to fill those beds, ask yourself whether you really want those beds. It is no crime to just seed them over with grass. Some sample objectives might be to block or enhance sightlines, to make the house look connected to the lot, to have flowers to watch and nurture, or just to fit in with the neighbours. Let us know how some of our comments strike you, and we may have more advice. I'd definitely start with a visit to the library for some general gardening and basic landscaping books. Just to clarify, in my mind gardening is the process of caring for the living things that plants are, while landscaping is the whole process of creating the external environment in which the plants will grow - but which may or may not actually include plants! Some landscapes are just gravel and boulders, for instance, or fishponds... KarinL

>I don't intend to split hairs by offering differing opinions, but the photos of the first two laurels look like every other 'Otto Luyken' I've ever seen, so not at all sure what the confusion might be>Dwarf English laurel, Prunus laurocerasus, probably 'Otto Luyken'>As to the ceanothus, I am also confused as to why one considers 'Victoria' to be the same or synonymous with 'Skylark'. The mature size of 'Victoria' would seem to negate that - 'Skylark' is typically considered a compact ceanothus, achieving a height of about 5' (one source states 3'x3') and about as wide or slightly wider. Victoria easily reaches double that size. And I've yet to locate a resource that confirms 'Victoria' is a hybrid - most sources and vendors are pretty unanimous in it being a cultivar of thrysiflorus. 'Skylark' may very well be a hybrid - its origins are a little sketchy - but I seriously doubt the two are the same plantThe origin of 'Skylark' remains ambiguous. Introduced by Mitch [sic] Nursery of Aurora, Oregon, the cultivar filtered through West Coast nursery channels until it was finally named by M. Nevin Smith with 'a desire to distinguish it from others in the trade' (Smith 1979). Parentage is thought to be Ceanothus thyrsiflorus var. thyrsiflorus x C. velutinus, which is consistent with the broad physical characteristics of the plant. It is believed by many to be the same plant grown in the nursery trade as C. thyrsiflorus 'Victoria'. Dense and compact, 'Skylark' has a dome-shaped form to 4 feet tall and 6 feet wide... --Fross/Wilken, Ceanothus (Timber Press) The dimensions given are of course not cast in stone or frozen in time, especially for such fast-growing shrubs. 4' x 6' would approximate a plant acquired as 'Victoria' I grew for a few years on Camano Island fairly well. Another specimen from the same source, planted in a different part of the property has not yet grown so broadly relative to its height. Two one gallon plants purchased from Emery's Garden as 'Skylark' and 'Victoria' were completely interchangeable at that stage of development. Since then growth on the hot sandy planting site has been slow, and one of them may have been lost beneath an overwhelming growth of weeds. >And having grown and sold C. obtusa 'Blue Feathers' for years, I have to say the shrub in question looks nothing like any other 'Blue Feather's I've seenAs far as can be seen in the picture it looks quite like another specimen I just planted.

O.K. Let's start with the Juniperus chinensis 'Blue Point'. . .most junipers PREFER full sun, but that usually only means that they will look their very best in full sun, not that they will collapse and die. In my own garden (and many others) I have successfully grown junipers (one of my favorite conifers) in LESS than full sun - I have a 16-year old J. 'Old Gold' that started out in full sun, but as the tree near it matured, the area became mostly dappled shade, with just one hour of direct morning sun. . .it's still going strong, but it's not as dense as before, and you definitely lose the golden new growth in the Spring. I'm currently growing J. 'Sargentii' in partial shade; it's simply not developing as quickly as another in the full sun. A J. communis started in 3/4 sun, finally had to come down when that reversed to 3/4 shade. . .but not before it had grown 20' tall ! ( I limbed the tree a few weeks before Christmas, so our holiday Bazaar had HUGE arrangements of juniper boughs, weighted down with masses of their blue berries - the hall actually reeked, beautifully!) The remaining trunk was cut into three sections, the bottom third left rooted in the ground, while the other two were lashed to the original to form a "natural" tripod. . .which is currently buried in clematis, C. 'Jackmani' and 'Guernsey Cream'. . . But I digress. . . The Juniperus 'Blue Point' in my side yard is growing in 3/4 sun, and doing well. . .how well it will do in your specific situation, I simply couldn't promise. Since the location is very "in your face" - you pass them every time you enter or exit the house - perhaps you should lean toward a more site-specific plant. Sorry. . .can't lie to you. . . :-) That brings us to another point that someone made about the "matching pair" of shrubs not growing identically (horrors!). . .so I have to share this story of how a very "anal" garden friend solved this exact problem. She had decided on a "matching pair" of shrubs on either side of the front steps leading up to her porch, but being obsessive, she INSTANTLY realized that they would be getting unequal amounts of sun (due to the sun's angle and the porch corner casting a partial shadow). Her solution? The two shrubs each went into large, individulal pots - I seem to remember they were some kind of hollies - and once a week, the pots were given a half turn in place, and then once a MONTH, the pots changed position. It didn't hurt that the pots were fiberglass, which cut down on the muscle required, but trust me, I would NEVER go that far for perfection !!! Gotta tell you, though - they did develop into a perfectly matched pair. . . Which makes me think: just as someone else suggested statuary, how about a pair of those tall, elegant pots (easily 3'-4'), each planted with a tall, stunning (4'-5') canna or other narrow perennial or annual, and mounding/cascading plants at the base of the central plant which would easily give you your 3' width and a teardrop look. Martha Stewart would love it. . . Answer to question: yes, yews ARE male and female. . .if you have one of the common Taxus cuspidatas (the kind available at Lowes and HD), all you need to do is locate a Taxus cuspidata 'Aurescens' (see the link below) and plant it nearby in the sun.. T. 'Aurescens' is a quite lovely, golden-needled evergreen which stays low to the ground. . .he's a real stud muffin, and the Taxus ladies in my garden have been popping out berries ever since I brought him home. . .CAUTION: IF THERE ARE LITTLE ONES AROUND, KNOW THAT THOSE BERRIES ARE VERY TOXIC !!! Finally, my personal experiences with Thuja 'Green Giant': terrific plant (developed with yours and my tax dollars by our National Arboretum), IN THE RIGHT LOCATION ! Because the sellers know they have a good product, they'll tell you anything to get you to buy it, like it grows only 8'-12'. . . that is total B.S. !!! Example: I planted a row of five of them along a friend's back fence just three years ago - while only 4' tall when we put them in, they are now OVER 12' tall !!! Following recommendations from many sources, I planted them 7' apart. . .sometime this growing season, they will finally meet and completely obliterate my friend's 6' fence. . .that's a pretty cool delivery on a promise of a fast screen! But even the National Arboretum will tell you that they will be at least 30' tall in 30 years, and will continue to grow over a lifetime into 60'-80' GIANTS. . .hence, their name. . . They are one of those rare shrubs/tress whose growth rate is so spectacular that you can easily afford to buy small (my 3'-4' specimens in 3 gallon pots were just $15. apiece!) - some other fast-growers I've had great success with are Leyland cypress and Betula nigra. Wow! I think this long-winded response adds up to four cents, at least. . . Carl Here is a link that might be useful: Missouri Botanical Garden Plantfinder

Just received my NM Native Plant Soc newsletter, and they are having their plant sale the last Saturday of April (4/29), so if you are not into the 3-1/2 straight hour drive to El Paso's plant sale at UTEP, there you go. (or you could try El Paso on Sunday, but what you want may be picked over) You can also join the Native Plant Society of NM---their website is at http://npsnm.unm.edu/ In early August they are having their Annual Conference in El Paso (yes, we have one chapter in TX since El Paso is quite allied w/ southern NM. I think the Cactus and Succulent Society here in Burque is also having a sale eventually.