Hi Daylily,

Thanks for the reply.

For the side plantings, I was not thinking about flower beds (sorry if I was not clear). I want some low hedge planting, but I don't want it to look like a hedge wall. Possibly some short grasses (2' tall, etc). The idea was suggested by my maintenance landscaper as a way to prevent weeds, but I will discuss with him the possibility of using weed killer as an alternative. For the back yard boundary (not mentioned in my original post), I plan to put some trees (Baby Blue Spruce?) for privacy.

As for the front garden bed, I agree with your advice. I plan to keep a lot of the shorter plants and rearrange them if possible. The tall grasses (close to 5' tall) and the forsythia will probably be removed as they create a wall effect on my walkway and front door. I'll try to do a good inventory of the plants later today.

Thanks again!

If you want to reduce the appearance of the wall effect along your walkway, I don't know if you'd be open to the idea of reducing the length of the bed along the walk. Part of the problem I think, is the height of the existing plants create the wall effect. But also, the fact that you have plants/garden bed for the entire length of the walkway.

One possibility is to re-arrange the bed such that a small part of the garden is removed, as follows: In which case, you'd have 3 small, low shrubs or perennials (eg: sedum or groundcover roses) in the garden at the front of it, along with two other "specimen" plants where I indicated. And then you'd fill in the rest of the bed with appropriate perennials or shrubs depending on what makes sense. By "specimen" I mean that you might have a medium-sized tree at the corner (you might already have one in place), and then a special plant near the front door - say a low-growing Japanese Maple.

Another possibility is to shorten the bed even further, such as the following: (I don't know if this would encroach on your big tree in the lawn though): Here again, you'd have to have a few "specimen" plants and then fill in beyond that with small shrubs and/or perennials:

Does the wall effect exist along the driveway? I don't think you've shown us a picture of that area but from the distance it doesn't look wall like to me. I think your idea of removing the grasses and the other tall plant to the right of the door (is that the forsythia?) should be your first step and then evaluate. You have very nice hardscape and edging and it would be a shame to change them if you don't really have to. You have some very nice plants that appear to have survived the deer in good shape--find out what they are take care of them!

Daylily--your plans look very nice, I'm just not sure he need to make such major changes:)

You seem to realize that this garden was poorly designed. The "designer" ignored a lot of things that are generally held principles among gardeners. As an example the bed in picture number three. It has plants that have no room to grow, too much variety, and tall plants growing in front of small plants. There is a plant that seems to be failing in that bed also.

The grass is ready to be divided which is good for you. You can mass plant them somewhere else. I also see a lily type plant that seems to want divided. I am in California so I could transplant them in a month or two. I think in NJ people wait until spring. Is that right?

These plants represent a large value to the garden and I hope they can be used somewhere else on your property.

Some professional landscape designers comment on this forum at times. I am not one of them.

Your lawn tree has a very dense canopy. As your garden evolves you will have to adjust plantings for the shade. Does your house face west?

I admit I have no skill for altering photos but I did so anyway. This is one way the view could be improved.

The view of the house and from the house will be improved if the tall grasses are moved. There is no need to destroy the paths.

I find myself interminably wishing that the 50-year old fad of dividing the main path/viewing platform to a building, and especially its entrance, with narrow gardens, would die a sudden, horrible death! The third graphic in this thread ("front view close-up") shows how counterproductive this solution is. It came about due to the increase in popularity of landscape gardening as a way to add more plants. It's good for the industry because it sells more plants and it's good for gardeners because it allows more plants. But gardening is often at odds with landscaping and building beautification. Using tall material in front of the building entrance does not help create a more beautiful building front or a more inviting entrance! In fact, the scheme of lining the central area of the front yard walk (which is generally near the center of the outdoor room, as front yards should be thought of) with skinny gardens filled with overly tall plants is diametrically opposed to the primary objective of landscaping ... beautification. In general, it should be the case that the building front is not smothered with plants, but decoratively adorned with them. Larger, bushy material would better go toward the outside edges of the front yard (toward the lot lines ... where one might want to screen neighboring views out of the picture) and above and below the building face, such as lawns, low ground cover and tree canopies ... such things FRAME the view. Logically, the nearer one gets to the entrance, the more likely it would be that smaller/lower plant material works better.

(In the above graphic, the elephant trunk appendage next to the walk and drive is the offending part.)

In my drawing, I'm suggesting a possible bed line .... not what would go in it. I stuck in some vague "bushiness" in order to suggest how such things are better toward the side, not in front of the building face ... anymore than one would cover their own face with a lot of hair. Instead, they would generally wear it to the sides and above their face.

A well groomed mustache and/or beard can enhance a man's face.

No doubt. That is what decorative adornment is. It does not smother or overwhelm other facial features.

What can't the garden be part of the adornment of the home?

Like Yardvaark, I'd take off that 'elephant trunk' right away and grow the lawn right up to the driveway. You have to leave room for an open car door and room to walk once you get out of the car.

Mike

@ junco ... it CAN ... but ....

A garden, per se, can be a random collection of plants that need no justification for their being included in a garden other than that their owner wants them. A landscape is a highly specialized garden in which the plants are usually part of a larger structure of plants, and specific demands are made on their abilities (to screen, produce shade, avoid looking bad, be maintainable at certain sizes, be permanent, etc.) In a non-landscape garden, very frequently the number one criteria for plant selection is its flowers. In a landscape garden, that is often the last criteria to justify selection. If one is buying plants and asking where they can be planted, that is likely gardening. If one has a place for a plant and is asking what plant will best work in that position, that is likely landscaping. A garden CAN be an adornment for a home, but it requires that one be more discriminating about what plants are chosen and where they are placed. Sometimes it can be very charming, but on the other hand it sometimes comes with higher maintenance. MOST people do not want to put forth the effort so gardens, per se, usually only work out well for a small percentage of people.

Yaardvark--

I understand and appreciate your explanation. But it still remains that your criteria for 'landscape' could be met by well chosen and placed plants which 'adorn' and enhance the house. I maintain that the landscape of this house could be improved by removing the plants which have been found to have outgrown the spot they were placed in. It is not necessary to completely redo what is there. Perhaps one goal of the original designer, whether professional or homeowner, might have been to provide a pleasing view from inside the house. It looks to me, from the pictures provided by the OP, as if this closeup view as well as the view from the street can both be provided by judicious tweaking of this plan. Mike agreed with removing the 'trunk' in order to provide a place to step when getting out of a car. I don't think we can tell if this is a concern--only the OP can decide that.

I hop the OP come back to let us know how he proceeds.

Junco, our discussion warrants its own thread beyond what is said here as this is a major argument (not meaning hostile, but opposing points.) What one concludes about the subject influences what people actually do.

"Perhaps one goal of the original designer, whether professional or homeowner, might have been to provide a pleasing view from inside the house." Many people have suggested in the past that this is/canbe/should be a separate goal or objective from creating appeal (as viewed FROM the street) but I do not believe this is actually a way to achieve this goal. People may have this idea in mind and then set out to sacrifice "street appeal" in their effort to create what they think is the solution. However, I cannot see that ANY sacrifice of street appeal is necessary in order to create "a pleasing view from inside." It is necessary to add to the scene ... but not in the wrong place, creating ill effects, no matter where viewed from.

Why would you think I would not agree with your statement? You are the one sacrificing part of the design. And,as I have already said, that is why I think the OP should remove ONLY the plants that have grown too tall and tweak the remaining beds to end up with pleasing views from within the house as well as from the street. 'Judicious tweaking' rather than a complete redesign, which is what your last picture shows!

Junco, I don't see how you can say I am "sacrificing part of the design." I have not proposed a planting scheme here .... only a bed. In many cases it is not practical to save and relocate shrubs. Many of the grasses could be used in another location in the front. It's up to someone to wade through that process, but it's not something I'm taking on. I would definitely get rid of "elephant trunk" but that is NOT a sacrifice. It is a rescue.

Hi All,

Wow, thanks for all the comments and discussions, its a learning experience to read it all. Generally, I prefer to leave the hardscape (the belgian blocks) because its less work for me, but after seeing some of the concepts, I'll play it by ear. I think the first step is to definately remove/move/trim some of the larger plants so I get a sense of what I am working with. I will try to update this post as I proceed in the work (and I'm sure I'll have more questions).

Thanks!

Barricade style gardening is almost as popular as the wiggly worm path/patio. My suggestion was an option to leave the elephant trunk because some people enjoy the barricade. It would also give Kyc84 time to plan what to do with this abundance of plants. As I mentioned before a lot of money was spent on this garden. Those golden conifers especially. What a shame to just dig them out and throw away. They could be planted all together and look very nice under the bay window. The OP is new to gardening. I thought he/she could gradually remove the trunk over time.

Good luck, kyc84, with your home, your landscape, and your garden.