The original design did not call for that weird angle of the walk popping out of the patio, it was rounded. But that's because the whole middle of the yard was going to be brick, with plant beds around it. The grass area in front of the garage was what I had to do to get it "finished" and under control to get ready to sell. I had posted about that part. I've tried to keep my landscape designer out of this discussion, but really she did not design a true phased plan that looks good at each phase, so when I had to scale back, there really wasn't anyplace to go with her plan. I wanted it in chunks of 5K, but her first phase ended up being 7K just for the hardscaping. At that point it was the middle of the summer and she had kept me waiting so long I went ahead with something cobbled instead of finding someone else to do another plan. My yard was all torn up because I had removed the deck thinking I was ready to go. All that had to happen was my LD had to get back to me with a revised, scaled-down plan. Well, six weeks later after numerous calls and e-mails, at which point I was actually searching for someone else to do my patio at the beginning of June, she got back to me with the same plan, same cost. Obviously a communication problem. I really don't want to get into that part because people are very sensitive about discssions about LDs. I am not dissing the profession or dissing my LD, it was just not a good "fit." But then I have also posted about the fact that there is a certain type of LD that is very difficult to find, small jobs, well phased, inexpensive, working with a lot of constraints instead of a "blank slate." I would say since folks like me in this working class town rarely have the money to hire LDs, LDs are not trained to design for row houses, rather they know how to design yards for new subdivisions. The really spectacularly talented folks here do not do small job$. We discussed that here. Some folks disagreed, but I think my generalization holds true. I'm not saying there wouldn't have been someone out there, I'm just saying it's not that easy to find them. I met the husband of a colleague at work who is a professional LD who only does big jobs and he offered to help me with some ideas for free but I didn't want to take advantage of him, based on the complaints I hear so often here. Looking back I should have taken him up on his offer. Here's and example of what I'm talking about, obviously the chainlink is not attractive, and in a small area, you notice every element. However, I only own one of the chainlinks there. So I could replace one side but not the other. Or I could put my other side of the fence in front of my neighbors fence, thus loosing scarce garden space. Also, to avoid the "bowling alley" look I would have had to invest in a really nice fence, which would have added to the cost even more. So priority wise, I opted to do the patio and shade elements first. Also, you can minimize the negative effects of chainlink by landscaping in front of it. Chainlink can somewhat "disappear" with vegetation in front of it. That's another solution. I've also seen some on these forums some ingenious ways of dressing up chainlink with plants, ornaments, beads, etc. I mean it's one thing to say, "That chainlink is ugly, that's your problem, get rid of it," and quite another to take a sow's ear and turn it into something maybe not resembling a silk purse but a really cool purse made out of a sow's ear so that you suddenly don't dis the idea of using a pig's ear for a purse, since that's what you have, pigs, not a silkworm farm. I don't know if they teach that kind of creativity in professional schools. Also, you're not necessarily going to be able to hire a contractor to give you that kind of creativity since that takes time for craftmanship. I think the best solutions for tiny working-class yards come from the creativity of the owners. Up the road from me there is a house with a stone wall built up against a chainlink. So from the inside of the yard you see a dry laid stone wall. A working class person cannot pay someone to do a dry laid stone wall in their back yard. And being myself extremely limited in the creativity and skill department, it was a challenge to "design" a good plan for my yard. Ironically, that's the kid of unique, creative solution that folks here could share. On the PA Gardening forum I saw someone's yard landscaped with broken concrete used like flagstone, who would have thunk it. And who was it who posted the picture of the wood patio and pergola her dad built--totally creative! I just don't have those abilities or access to them. Sorry I didn't keep track of my advisors, it is a very hectic time with a job change and move on the horizon. Without wanting to offend, and yet being perfectly honest about "what I learned," I have to say that the touchiness, concerns about "appropriate postings" and strong taste ideas on this forum inhibits some of the kind of creative discussion that a forum like this could foster. Seems to me that a free public forum is where non-professionals who are trying to pinch pennies can go to share and help each other out--for free and for the sheer fun of it. I'm a professional too, and I participate in these forums for the fun of sharing and creative community. This is not directed at anyone, most certainly not at the professionals who post here. I don't mind blunt and prickly or strong. It's the $$ issue that I wonder about. I've seen people shut down who attempt to discuss lower end options, and yet realistically that's why someone would want to post here. If they could afford high end they'd be sitting in an air-conditioned office with their LA. That's a huge issue for most of us, how to do something lower end but not tacky. I saw an adorable waterfront cottage the other day on a drive, then realized as I was leaving that it was a housetrailer with a screened in porch added, sided and roofed to match and landscaped all cottagey. Yes, it was a trailer and would never be mistaken for a high end beach cottage, but the owner had made the best of what they could afford, made something tasteful out of something inexpensive. That's true elegance in my book. I have learned that this type of creativity is very hard to come by and usually comes from the "idiot savants" of the masses! :-) On the flip side, sometimes you have to bite the bullet and call in a professional. This forum often helps people sort that out, when is it time to call in the guy with the backhoe.

"So, if I used potting soil with fertilizer included should I still do the half strength every other time thing? That goes for summer and for winter. I have never really gotten the hang of fertilizers." How you should (or can) fertilize depends on a combination of factors. If I knew the factors, I could recommend a fertilizer program - but I don't, so I can't. What I can say though, is that supplemental nutrition is tied directly to your soil composition and your watering habits. You will have the happiest plants if you fertilize every time you water with a low dose of fertilizer - even in the winter, but you can only do that if you're using a soil that allows you to water beyond total saturation, so that at least 10-15% of the total volume of water applied exits the drain. E.g., I use 10 drops of Foliage-Pro 9-3-6 in each gallon of water EVERY time I water my plants - all winter long. I never have the problems with insects, diseases, and failing plants that are so often described on this forum. The level of dissolved solids (how much stuff is dissolved in the water) in plant cells and in the fertilizer determines how easily or how much difficulty plants have absorbing water and the nutrients dissolved in water. Plants absorb water and fertilizer when the level of solutes in their cells is high, and the level of solutes in the soil solution is low. On one hand, plants would never be thirsty if all we gave them was water with nothing dissolved in it (distilled, e.g.), but then they would be lacking nutrients. If we say, "Ok, lets load em up with food so they grow fast, we run into problems because the level of solutes in the soil solution gets so high that it makes it difficult for the plant to absorb water and the nutrients dissolved in water. So you see, it's a balancing act. Ideally, we supply just enough nutrients to satisfy the plants nutritional needs, keeping nutrient levels low, but still in the adequacy range. Make sense so far? The best way to do this is to supply continual low doses of fertilizer regularly, and flush out the old accumulations of salts when you water. Even if you're not fertilizing at all, if you water in little sips, the stuff dissolved in your tap water accumulates in the soil and eventually makes it very difficult to impossible for plants to absorb water. Improper watering absolutely guarantees a plant that is relegated to growing always at some fraction of it's potential genetic vigor, even when every other cultural factor is perfect. Using an appropriate soil and watering properly, on the other hand, guarantees the opportunity for plants to grow AT their level of genetic potential when other cultural factors are perfect. FWIW, the reference to light levels upthread is an over-simplification of how light affects plants, and is in error because it gives the sun singular importance in determining whether a plant thrives. An inadequate or inappropriate light level is only one of a long list of limiting factors, which includes every nutrient necessary for growth, temperature, moisture levels, soil structure, and many more. Each of these cultural considerations is equal to the effects of the sun in that they all have the same potential to kill the plant. You mentioned that you haven't gotten the hang of fertilizing ...... If you have specific questions, it's likely that I can answer and I'll try to the best of my ability. Al

Here's how I would lay your areas out. I spec 5" clear alzak recessed fixtures with 75 watt PAR halogen lamps for general lighting and 4" low votage clear alzak for task and accent lighting.Do not use white baffles on the 5" cans nor gimbel rings on the 4" cans. Your kitchen needs 5" cans on 4' spacing down the centre of the space,not on the counter edges.Any more than that is wasting your money. One 4' low voltage with a 35 watt narrow flood lamp over the sink is all that is needed. It's your choice of 3-4" low voltage cans or 3 mini-pendants over the island.(the counter really only needs 2, but some designers prefer odd numbers, hence the three) In your family room, place 4-5" cans INSIDE the furniture grouping. Then add 4" low voltage cans on the fireplace, and any other wall space that has anything to accent.This will provide a beautiful effect in this space. These fixtures will also provide refected light which will provide "fill" light that is necessary when using all recessed fixtures in a space. Under counter can be linear flourescents or Xenon pucklights or Xenon bars.

the cabinets have plywood backs yes. Blocking may not be needed but it will make it easier and not all of my cabinets land on a stud so blocking is necessary. I wouldn't remove it becuase I just installed it. lol In my area, at least, you do not need nail plates when the wiring is centered in the stuff.