Hi, I'm not a pro but here's what I would do. Get rid of shrubs under windows and enlarge the bed to run down the side of the stairs.

I think retaining walls will look too blocky. Given the already hard lines of the stairs, I see some large boulders artfully placed to anchor plantings all across the slope. (Watch for construction in your area. Many builders will be glad to give them to you. Sometimes they'll drive them over in a loader if you live close.) Maybe a pro can tell you if you need a low retaining wall or curb of some kind along the driveway given the slope.

Forget grass and select some ground covering perennials and shrubs for year-round interest.

I think a rock garden concept would look great.

I'd grow a climber up the blank wall.

If I had money to spend, I'd replace the rail ties with stonework and build a lovely wooden handrail instead of the aluminum one.

Once I'd chosen a general garden style and colour scheme I'd paint the front door, shutters and other doors in a complementary colour.

There. I've spent the entire imaginary budget. Lol

Thanks for the ideas, Kaillean. House wise, I'm wanting to keep the yellow color of the house, but maybe go a dark gray for the shutters (if I keep them), change out the storm door to full glass, and paint the front door medium/dark blue. I'm a Doctor Who fan and love the color of 10's TARDIS. I was thinking this color.

I'd say the first thing you need to do is overcome your shade denial. I know it's hard. I've been fighting it for years. But it really is much better if you accept it, and stick to plants that will grow in the real world conditions. So the grass goes. It is a sun plant - the more the better. It isn't the hill that is the problem, but the shade. Such things are usually covered with a groundcover like pachysandra or vinca.

If it isn't a full shade plant, get rid of it.

If it isn't a full shade plant, don't plant it.

It is going to cut down on your choices tremendously, which is why people don't want to do it. Showy, flowering plants tend to be sun plants. Shade color is often variegation, which isn't going to show up well with the house color. To be honest, I'd paint the house Tardis blue, and the door red. Then not worry that the plants are all various shades of green.

That door color would look great with your house. I like your yellow house paint color.

Asm, you did a bang-up job of posting photos that well explain your front yard. They inspired me to create some suggestions in pictorial form. The bad news is that I fell asleep last night before uploading the finished product and woke this morning to find my computer had fallen onto the floor and was stone cold dead, with my picture of your yard trapped within. I (unhappily) will try to convey my suggestions verbally.

If you really want to make your husband happy, you can tell him that a landscape architect has suggested that a scruffy, scraggly tree be planted far too close to the left, front corner of the house. Even though it will cause some very annoying problems in the future, it will get him out of the work or expense of removing it now, and there will be no danger of it looking like you all are trying to outdo the neighbors on the street appeal front. With that settled, he could go on a number of years being content without needing to do anything.

Later, when the time comes, I would suggest you remove all of the foundation plantings as I see nothing that is serving you well. What would work better is a small tree set farther away, off of the left front corner of the house, in a bed of groundcover. (See just about any of the drawings I've done for others to get the general idea.) The bed would be largest off of the house corner and recede as it approaches the stoop. I'm not a fan of foundation plantings that end up as smothering barriers to the whole house. Instead, a single shrub below the window (the "window box" solution) is sufficient to coordinate with the architectural features and provide some interest. Blooming annuals can go between the shrub and stoop for some cheer for the entry and street appeal experience. And groundcover would connect to the bed (below the small tree) and knits the disparate elements into a single, unified mass.

What the steps need is a set of low cheekwalls flanking them in order to keep dirt and plantings off of them. (The ties serve to do this at one side but they don't look very handsome. And they're unnecessarily tall. It should be more like curb height so as not to create the appearance of a hollow void at their back side.

The window right of the door needs a shrub below it, too, but obviously, a taller one, due to its height above the slope. The shrubs do not need to match, and likely wouldn't. They just need to fit and be properly shaped for their respective spaces. The slope between house and steps would best be covered by a single, solidly planted, uniform groundcover. It could be a little taller than the groundcover spoken of earlier. Liriope, if it grows there, could be an example.

At the main part of the front yard, due to the slope and shade of the tree, I can't see any reason why you would be interested in growing grass. It would always be unhappy, and always a pain to mow. This is a groundcover front yard as groundcover would be so much easier. You wouldn't need to worry about height as it is predetermined by the groundcover you select. All you need to do is edge it and periodically keep it from climbing the tree, if it has that propensity. BTW, in one picture I see low hanging branches from that tree. If you are concerned about street appeal, branches should not be hanging in front of the face of your house any more than one would let hair hang down and cover features of the face. Covering features that way does not enhance the house appearance. It looks like some degree of neglect more often than not. I also notice that there is a new, young tree growing up between the steps and existing tree. Remove this to another location as it doesn't look good -- or well thought out -- to have a tree coming up under the canopy of another tree. It looks like the start of an invasion of sorts.

To the right of the drive, I would balance off the yard with another tree in a bed of groundcover. As with the shrubs, the trees do not need to match and probably wouldn't because of the different conditions, including light and elevation. They just need to balance. It would be best to push the tree away from the house and toward the lot line such that a path to the back yard would probably occur between the tree and the house.

Laptop now recovered. (After I ordered replacement!)

FWIW, here is a photo comparison of two different ways of handling a slope planting ... that just happened to be side by side. One is a landscape solution of solid groundcover. The other is a gardening solution of someone's every-favorite-plant-that-can-be-squeezed-in.

No need to upgrade the railing. Just spray paint it flat black.

I've seen some lovely gardens along slopes along driveways. Not sure why creating a garden area (if you indeed LIKE to garden) is not a "landscaping solution." If you don't like to garden, forget it, too much work. And there are tons of lovely flowering plants that will grow in shade, but hard to grow anything under a large tree with aggressive roots that suck all the nutrients and moisture out of the soil, which is what you are competing with in your front yard. Looks like a silver maple. Not sure why you need two there . . .

"I've seen some lovely gardens along slopes ..." It would be hard to say without being able to see and evaluate the same thing. It might be the case that I'd agree. But more often than not, most cases are like the above picture where the "garden" (and the tree) clearly exists not for what it can do for the larger objectives of the landscape, but in spite of them. Instead of a nice complexion for the yard, it reads like acne or mange.

To me it looks like the people in that house would rather look out and see a tree than a view of the street.

Edited to add something more germane to the topic at hand. Landscaping is solving problems and doing it in an aesthetically pleasing way. In your case Asm, I would hazard a guess that the problem of the lawn looking scraggly is being caused by the fact that you have two silver maples planted in your front yard, a tree that is notoriously known for having an aggressive root system. It's ideal for planting along a river edge for just that reason, it holds the soil in and resists erosion. On the flip side, any grass or flowers or whatever that you plant there will not be able to compete for nutrients, sun and water with the tree. The tree closest to the driveway is also of poor form/broken and planting two trees so close together they are probably competing with each other. You could dump a load of topsoil or fertilizer onto your yard, and the tress would just send out more roots to fill it up. You could build a retaining wall and do raised beds, same result eventually, unless you gave it a root impermeable bottom. So the solution to your problem is not to plant something there, nothing will grow properly. The solution is to either live with it, or cut the tree down, grind up the stump, and then you can proceed, based on your interests and taste. You've got several other trees around your house for shade, the people who planted those trees probably did it just to "do something" with that spot, or who knows, maybe they loved silver maples. Either get rid of it, or live with scraggly grass. Or plant groundcovers and flowers there and live with scraggly groundcovers and flowers. You have options! :) I'm a tree hugger from way back so I'd just fight a never-ending battle with those maples for nutrients and soil. :) I'd probably indulge in a few big planters (with bottoms) out front to solve the root problem. Not really a "landscaping solution." I'd be more concerned about the long term implications of all those trees and shrubs up against your house, as my landscaping renovation priority.

The shrubs against your house are past their prime, they were planted too close to the house and too close together and have been poorly pruned, so you're not losing anything. Same with the tree, a newer one planted a ways away from the house would look better almost immediately, even if you did the same species of tree. That's a yew if I'm not mistaken and they get quite big so constantly pruning that baby to keep it away from the house is doing it no favors.

In the "bad" photo that Yardvaark posted, you have three houses that dealt with a sloping front lawn on a busy street in three different ways. One just kept grass there and called it a day, allowing them theoretically to focus on more eye appealing plantings in a private backyard. The second probably got sick of mowing and put one ubiquitous ground cover there. The third put some things they thought might be nice but aren't very artfully arranged and are a pain to keep looking nice. There isn't necessarily a "one size fits all" approach to solving that problem, but a great landscape design would be low maintenance, give privacy from the street, and look good all at the same time. And often "looking good" is in the eye of the beholder.

The point of groundcovers is that many accept the conditions that exist below trees and will happily coexist with a dense network of roots. Likely, they will be viney and tolerate shade.

Pink mountain, I can see we disagree on some things at the root level. I will consider bringing up some of those subjects in separate threads since some people have recently expressed an interest in discussing issues and theories ... probably starting with your first or last claim, above.

Yes there are things that can survive under a silver maple, like the invasive and ubiquitous periwinkle that is in one of the houses in your "bad" photo. As I said, if you know what you're up against it can be done, if you know the tree and know the groundcovers as far as their habits. Is that landscaping? You're the one who said it looked like mange so I avoided that option. I never said it couldn't be done, I have and am doing it. As I said, Asm has options and one of them is to deal with the two trees there and work around them, and one way is to plant the right kinds of ground cover and nurture them so they can better compete with the tree, which is actually what I might do, but I am a plant and tree weenie. I actually teach a lesson on how to plant under trees in my horticulture class, and if you Google that topic, you can find out how to do it properly. But that's a separate post I would think. A casual googling came up with this as the first hit, Planting Under a Tree, from "Fine Gardening." There's even a mention of maples being tricky.

There isn't one way to landscape. From an aesthetic perspective and for the health of the plants, the trees and shrubs in Asm's yard aren't very artfully placed, but if you like them Asm, and it pleases your sensibilities, then the rest is gardening. If you're not particularly happy, then the rest is a discussion of how you could re-landscape your yard, and if you want to include an edged flower border along that slope, then that is a new goal to add to the overall picture.

What about moving stairs to the left and making them much wider?

Asm I am posting some more because I don't want you to think that because I said your landscape elements weren't "artfully arranged" that I don't think they are beautiful or that you don't have a great looking front yard. Quite the contrary, I love the way it sits on the lot, I love the way the yellow compliments the greenery. I love the entrance. "Artfully" referred to some problematic plant placement issues that you already identified as wanting to fix.

I also understand that if you are married to someone who has very different opinions about what to do with the yard, it can make it difficult. For example, here is a photo from my parents yard, and while the dogwood is pretty, this is probably a poster child for how NOT to plant under a tree, even a dogwood which is fairly tolerant. The tree isn't doing too well and it might just be because it is overplanted. My mom loved gardens but my dad insisted they were too much work so "no more garden beds." Dad even went as far as gluing the border bricks together so they could not be moved or rearranged. Weird if you ask me but that's the way he is and mom tried to "work around" him by cramming all the things she loved under that tree. As a side note, mom died suddenly and now that she is gone, all dad wants to do is plant things everywhere. Lesson learned too late, a cautionary tale. But I am sure my dad is not alone in having a particular and stubborn aesthetic that might need to be "worked around." Yet another problem for the landscaper to solve!

I'm also posting because I live in an apartment house where my landlady is a great gardener with lovely beds under two silver maples and a norway maple, which is silver maple's evil cousin when it comes to being difficult to plant under. So I didn't want you to think it couldn't be done, and done well. Some of the plants are hostas, coral bells/heuchera, lilies, columbine, lily of the valley, bishop's weed, day lillies and varigated solomon's seal. Some of the beds are slightly raised and she does have to redo/refresh them from time to time.

In this photo, the house with the additional hosta along it is the neighbors yard, this bed in the foreground is along the border of our driveway, the norway maple is at the end of the bed. I might have added some brunnera, (false forget me not) ferns and astilbe for more texture and color and late season bloom, but they are harder to come by around here. Also at work we have lungwort and Virgina bluebells that seem to do well under a lot of trees, although I don't know if I have seen it specifically under maples. It's a gorgeous spring bloomer though.

I'm purposely not giving the perspective as to how these beds relate to the house, to preserve some privacy. Let's just say they look adorable! ;) It's a cottage style home, it's a cottage style landscape. These photos are not for you to necessarily copy, just some ideas of plants that can do well under trees. These types of beds would easily fit within Yardvaark or Vestavay's schematics.

I appreciate the suggestions made here, given with realistic explanations for what they entail. Everyone has different time horizons and budgets for addressing aspects of their properties. Discussions like these are so helpful to me to avoid wasting time and money on planting schemes that are set-ups for either endless investment to make work or outright failure. The biggest lesson I've learned from Gardenweb posters this year is choosing the plant that fits, (not just now, but in five and ten years., and understanding what that choice will look like in the meantime.

I would add another consideration to the choice to be made here -- context. It looks from the picture that the adjacent properties have similar sloping lawns with large trees. It is the classic American suburban landscape of an unbroken greensward. But if one person converts his lawn to a groundcover (which is what I would do, and I happen to like the pedestrian pachysandra, vinca and ivy for this purpose), how should he handle the boundaries?

@ Kitasei, about boundaries ... if you look into any established neighborhood, it will be common for one yard's plants (true of all plant types: trees, shrubs, groundcover, etc.) to encroach into the adjacent yard. The truth is that the typical person barely cares. Most people are indoor oriented. They have the goal of some privacy in their yard, and for them, as long as there's something green screening the surrounding neighbors out, they're good with it. It usually works out fine because the common interests are the same.

Legally, one does not have an obligation to stop plants from travelling in to their neighbor's yard. And sometimes the plants are welcome. If one yard has a condition that is solved by using a groundcover instead of turf, it's very likely that the same condition occurs in the yard immediately next door. (Though many times the neighbor may not recognize the solution until they see it next door.) If one does not like what's coming from their neighbor's yard, they have the right to stop it at the property line, and the onus is on them to do it. They cannot tell the neighbor not to plant something for fear it will come into their yard. Most people are respectful of others and go a bit out of their way a bit to plant things that will not be invasive or difficult to manage, and they give a little clearance to the property line so that the plant is not immediately threatening the neighbor. (But birds and wind plant a lot of things and they have no respect for property lines at all.) If one does not have the legal obligation to keep a plant (like a groundcover) from encroaching on their neighbor's property, there's nothing that stops them from just being nice and establishing and maintaining a barrier of some kind, if they wish.

I've mentioned several times before about when I lived in Atlanta and had a yard that was half English ivy. It was there before I owned the property, but I came to love it because not only was it nice looking (in an area where grass wouldn't grow) it was super easy to take care of. It so happened that it was along a property line that adjoined 4 separate lots and all of those neighbors has it as a groundcover in their yard, too. I don't think anyone was unhappy about it because it was looking nice and solving problems for all of us. If someone were to move in to one of those properties and be an ivy hater, try to get rid of it, it is obvious that they would have great difficulty since they would be surrounded by it. If that were the case, I would look at them as not recognizing a great problem solver for what it is, and not using good sense when they bought the property, if ivy bothered them that much. One must use plants that do the jobs that need be done.

I understand and agree with you, Yardvaark, but was thinking more of the continuity that is lost when a different groundcover is laid like a carpet to a straight boundary. I think the way to do it is to begin by planting it as islands around the trees, perhaps adding a few shrubs near the boundary that can be grounded in their own islands, and then gradually expanding them until they merge... or not. Having a few paths isn't a bad idea either. I just wanted to point out the "park" character of many attractive suburbs that can be preserved in spirit. I love pachysandra because its edges are neat but naturally curved if unchecked in my area.. Same with wild geranium. Vinca, on the other, seems to need an edge which takes away the natural island effect I have in mind.

Neither do I disagree with you Kitasei that it can be a good thing to start with groundcover around trees and enlarge this over time. That's often the way it goes, with the expansion of groundcover following the demand for it.

On the other hand, it's not uncommon for people to react to conditions LONG after the conditions have presented themselves. An entire large area -- like a whole front yard -- can be begging for groundcover but it doesn't come forth. Eventually, when it's noticed that there's nothing good growing in the yard, then it will probably be a matter of going all the way to the lot line right now. If the neighbor is still mowing, that's often sufficient to limit a groundcover from getting very far into his yard (depending.)

Hi, all! Didn't mean to post and run, but long days at work prevented me from being able to do a proper post. Thank you everyone for the input and advice, especially you, Yardvaark (sorry about your laptop)! It's been incredibly helpful to "see" the situation from fresh perspectives.

Yardvaark, I absolutely love the rendering you did! When I was first thinking about a garden bed below the windows, it never occurred to me to have it curve or expand beyond the house. My "plan" last year was essentially a rectangle, but I didn't really love it and decided to do nothing.

Regarding the scraggly tree on the front left (the one my husband doesn't want to remove), I was able to take a closer look tonight and it definitely needs to go. I didn't realize quite how tall it is, nor how close it is to the house. The main trunk is inches away from the gutters and it's easily 10 feet taller than the house. I think once I have a solid plan for the space, my husband will be more willing to remove the tree.

I also think I might have more sun than I initially thought. We had a sunny day today, so I took some pictures at 7 pm and 8 pm. I don't know what kind of light it gets at other times of the day, but I wanted to mention it, since it's more than I had initially thought it got in the summer.

7 pm

8 pm

I'd like to keep the trees in the yard, but agree that they need pruning. I'm also not sold on replacing the grass with a groundcover. Not sure if that's stubbornness or something else, but I will keep it in mind as I keep forming a plan.

I think part of what's appealing to me about the retaining walls is that I have an idea/vision of what I'd like them to look like, but I also don't want it to look out of place with what I'm working with and the aesthetics of the house and space.

I pinkmountain, I definitely didn't think you were being negative about my house! I think it's got some great features and that there's lots of potential to make it look awesome. I think the big issues have been the fact that we didn't know what to do to make it better, so we did nothing, rather than do something hasty to just change things up. I also think we stopped noticing our front yard, so we became blind to what things looked like and how it could be better.

I'm loving this conversation. It's made me think about the space in ways I haven't before and I'm enjoying reading about the reasons behind people's suggestions.

asm, given your desire to keep the lawn, I was going to suggest maybe starting with an area of groundcover along the stairs and around the lamppost, since that's where the grass looks patchiest (and it probably gets the least light there closest to the house). Then you can decide if you like it and whether to expand. But, you mentioned the retaining walls again and that you have a plan in mind. Can you give a better idea of what you are thinking? Maybe sketching where you imagine they will go on one of the pics of your yard? If you can do that, then I think Yardvaark and others could give you some good feedback on whether what you have in mind is feasible and how best to implement it.

Well, if you are interested in thinking about your space in new ways, consider that the silver maple is holding in the soil of the bank along your driveway. Remove it, and you'll have to have something in place to serve that function. I would be one to resist the idea that there is only one way that could be that will "work." That's why I think it helps to see what other people have done with similar spaces and learn from other people's experiences--what they ended up liking and not liking, what worked for them. A lot of people know what they don't want, but have a hard time figuring out what they do want because they haven't seen it yet. I know I get lot of ideas from perusing magazines, blogs and here on Houzz. When you do that with a landscapers eye, you can see what it is about the form and color of the plants that you like. But as for the exact species, there are many options for the same effect. And each one has their pros and cons.

How about a retaining wall and some creeping phlox? I have no skin in the game on any of these.

The photo I posted above of that rigid island around the dogwood is a good example of what Katasei mentions about starting with islands around your trees, and then expanding outwards. That's what I am going to do with that area under the dogwood to improve it, expand the bed so the tree can breathe a bit, and transplant all those perennials mom loved to some more logical space. What she wanted was a cottage garden and that just wasn't possible under that tree. I'm going to replace what is there with something low growing that will compliment the form of the tree. And I too have a whole bunch of shrubs, both evergreen and deciduous, planted too close to the house, in shade rather than the sun they need, and suffering from years of improper pruning. To me, that's where you can start and have the most immediate effect, practically a no-brainer. Pull out those shrubs and that evergreen tree and they will never even be missed, even if you never planted anything there. But it opens up a manageable area for you to start on and get your creative juices flowing.

I did some more poking around on the slope today and found some cantaloupe sized stones scattered around, mostly covered by soil. Now I'm wondering if the old owners combated the slope issue by doing a kind of rock garden, possibly with groundcover or something. So that's something I'm going to think about as well.

As far as what I'm thinking with the retaining wall, the picture you posted above, I pinkmountain, is very much what I was thinking. Excuse the crudeness of this picture, but this was kind of what I was thinking. (I want to keep the light, but it was distracting in the picture.)

I'm thinking the wall closest to the driveway would be no more than 2.5 feet, the second one be no more than 2 feet, and the top one would just be to level off the end of the slope and define the top bed. Some plants I'm thinking about for the area are hostas, astilbe, or creeping phlox. I also have a variety of purslane that I tossed into the railroad tie beds years ago and it seems to love the area, so much so that I noticed that it's slipped out of the bed and is now growing on the other side of the steps.

And this might be a stretch, given the conditions, but was wondering if I might be able to plant some early spring bulbs there as well, like crocus, daffodil, and tulips. My thought process was that they might bloom before the trees leaf out, but that might be asking too much.

I can see that you're trying to achieve the terraced effect, but this is not a good retaining wall plan. Walls like this would spill soil out the ends unless you built returns at each end, adding to the cost and complexity. Keeping it real, there's practically nothing worse than a poorly or cheaply built retaining wall. If one is going to have them, they need to be the real thing and be built well. Otherwise, they will look bad always and fail prematurely. Digging with the tree roots add more complexity, expense and probable unhappiness for the tree. (Retaining walls extend down into the ground a fair amount.) Neither is a retaining wall system like this going to be impressive when viewed from the front. Unless you have a budget of several thousand dollars for well made retaining walls, I would give up on this plan. I think you're adding it for a cosmetic effect but in fact if you took less money and put it into a planting plan that made sense, you would be way ahead. If you want to terrace something like this, it would make much sore sense to remove the vertical timbers and do it on the other side of the steps ... and put in a nice cheekwall along the outside of the steps to keep the soil off of them and create an overall tidier appearance.

I am curious why you want to do the terrace. Are you trying to avoid mowing on the slope? Why can't you just plant Astilbe, etc. in the ground without the terraces. Does mud wash off the slope?

I really liked vstavay's idea of making wider steps with landings and placing them away from the foundation. It provides an attractive entryway to the home instead of a steep row of steps to slog up. It avoids planting in the trees' root zone. I can picture pots of colorful shade flowers on the landings with foliage plants on the terraces. I'm reposting to see what the experts think as no one responded to vstavay's idea. Perhaps the slope is too steep. I hope it can generate some brainstorming.

Yardvaark, I know exactly what you're saying and that's why I started this thread; to get input from other sources. I think that me calling this a plan was a bit of a reach, since I'm at the beginning of this process.

Honestly, we bought this house when we were "kids" (24), quickly became house poor, then focused our extra income to fixing the interior, so we're just now to the point that we can start figuring out the exterior.

Emmarene, it's not so much that I'm set on the terraced look, and my husband has no objecting to mowing the slope, but I've had difficulty trying to visualize planting on the slope itself. I don't want it to look like I just haphazardly stuck plants all over and I'm concerned that that's exactly what it would look like without something more substantial to "ground it". Additionally, while I haven't really seen much evidence of erosion, I am concerned that planting as-is would start the erosion process.

I also liked Vstavay's idea for expanding the steps, but that's an expense that I know my husband won't go for. (I showed him the picture and his response was "that looks cool, but that would cost way more than we were wanting to spend.")

I wish there was a way to sort through real estate listings by landscaping attributes :-) If there was, I'd send you to the suburban Philly listings, and let you browse through the split levels. Hills like this are very common, and nobody in their right mind thinks of terracing. That seems to be a peculiarly midwestern response to anything that isn't perfectly level.

Perhaps if you think of groundcover as 'grass that will grow in the shade', it will be more palatable. Grass is just groundcover that grows in the sun.

I can understand the fear of "sticking plants haphazardly all over" cuz that's exactly what it will look like. (I refer to the right half of the side-by-side slope planting picture I submitted above.) Not sure I understand the fear of groundcover. It's just a lawn that actually grows in shade. Is there a fear of lawn .... low, uniform planting ... that doesn't even need mowing, only edging? If the fear exist but no questions are asked about it, then no help can be given to resolve the fears. Suppose grass WOULD grow everywhere in your front yard. Then what? Wouldn't you create a bed(s) and the rest would be grass lawn? Since grass won't grow (well) why wouldn't you create a bed(s) and the rest be low groundcover? The same scheme but with plants that accept the conditions you're providing. I'm stymied about your fear of groundcover.

I think it's the fear of the unknown. No one I know does groundcover like that. I don't want to put down growncover, only to have it take over our entire yard and the yards of our neighbors.

I don't want my neighbors to have to battle with any kind of invasive plant. A neighbor put an ivy plant on ground one winter and we've been battling it for a decade.

The most helpful advice I got when I was at your stage was to lay hoses down to define the lines of possible beds, whether for perennial borders, trees and shrubs, or ground cover. Doing this lets you visualize the layout from different perspectives, and also to experience the width/slope of any paths that you will be creating.

As to your fear of using ground cover in a neighborhood of seamless lawns, I would go back to my earlier suggestion to think islands rather than whole yard. Area rugs as opposed to wall to wall carpeting. I appreciate that lawns in the front yard are a powerful cultural force in many American neighborhoods (I believe Tocqueville talked about it as one of our odd character defining phenomena!). They represent a kind of commons. I grew up in a suburb of NYC in the fifties, and remember the handful of houses that replaced lawns with pachysandra. The architecture and landscapes were jarringly modern albeit exciting. I know this will sound very funny to many of you, especially those on the west coast, but it's true. Think how controversial it can still be to put a vegetable garden in your front yard in many neighborhoods...

I am not trying to persuade you to grow ground cover. However, if you want to try some there are plants that cover ground and do not grow by creeping. Here are a few examples.

Here is a bed of blue fescue. It may not appeal to you but it grows in clumps and here in California it does not get out of control.

There are also prostrate shrubs grown as groundcover. Some do root where they touch the ground though, you would not want that type. Just know what you are getting.

Where there is enough sun people often use Daylily as a ground cover. Again, maybe it is aggressive in Missouri. Here it is easy to control.

I almost forgot, Hosta is used as a ground cover also. Sadly, it does not do well where I live.

The reason I bring it all up is that I like the image Yardvaark made for you and the look of the ground cover in the area where you will be removing the tree near the house. If you want to try it, there are safe options available.

Just don't by a creeping plant.

Thought I'd post an updated picture, since we made some changes this past week that have made a big difference!

Nice improvement, that tree really was too close. The hedge looks better too but I wonder if a different variety might handle the shade better. What are they?

Removing the tree and revealing the full roofline and corner of the house makes the house look much more substantial. Looking at the picture, I think a lower foundation planting - just enough to cover the foundation - would do likewise. I think your style house looks best embracing its horizontal modernism, lying lightly on the land but not hidden by plantings, as if a cozy cottage, or using it as punctuation marks for grandiosity like a colonial.