Standard advice is to not have trees directly between the street and your front door. You have already come to this conclusion. Trimming won't fix the problem; only a couple of trees have low branches. I can't see the upper part of your trees. Are they full or are they spindly? Consider which trees might best be taken down to open up the space.

A walkway to the street would make your front door more obvious. A very long walk up a hill should have at least one landing and a railing on one side. Lighting is also very important. Meandering your stairs can prevent them from becoming a floodway during heavy rains.

Tiburon Hillside · More Info

Your hill is steep. I seriously doubt you could reduce the slope of the drive without regrading and adding retaining walls. You would certainly lose a lot of trees. Watch for erosion. A small rill can become a gully with frequent rain. You might consider adding small boulders on the steepest areas. Dig them into the hillside so each leans into the slope, but sits securely. Soil removed can be placed above and behind the boulders. Add plants into the soil between.

Boulder Retaining Wall - Sellwood · More Info

Thank you so much mindshift for your well thought out response. It's funny that your standard advice aligned with my gut feeling, I just couldn't come to the realization alone.

The tall trees are pine trees and yes I would say spindly is a good adjective for them. The understory trees are dogwoods. Do you think maybe clearing out the dogwoods might be enough?

I really like the look of the boulder retaining wall. It adds a natural look to it rather than the straight lines of block. Maybe incorporating that in with stairway would make the front feel more approachable and like it belongs.

Good call to keep in mind lighting. I hadn't thought of that. A steep meandering staircase in the dark is a recipe for disaster. I worry though that it may be difficult to incorporate a landing.

Thanks again for all your advice!

Where are you, and possibly more important, where are you from? My feeling is that you are trying to take cookie cutter solutions to what isn't a cookie cutter problem. How many times do people walk straight across the street, to where the camera is placed, and stand and look at the house? How much pedestrian traffic do you get to the house? We can't see the front walkway to say anything about it, and possibly regrading the driveway isn't something easily judged from photographs.

I am just North of Atlanta, zone 7b. Originally from the Pittsburgh area where there tends to be much fewer trees in front yards, so maybe that is driving it a bit. I don't want cookie cutter, but I think I really dislike the look of towering pines. That's not to say I'm opposed to all trees. I think it'd be more visually interesting to have a few different types of trees to the sides but still have a view of the house.

We get a decent amount of foot traffic up to house, but I think it's more that I like the visual aspect of a staircase (maybe natural stone or something.) I'm not opposed to the hilly terrain. It just makes it more challenging and expensive, but when done right it is more interesting.

I agree there needs to be some smaller plants mixed in, but I wanted to figure out first if/which trees need to go. Also completely agree about the small patch of grass looking out of place. But would expanding it to be a landing for a set of stairs look ok?

After looking at the pics a bit more the sidewalk doesn't even really impact the curb view. It's something that bothers me when I get closer to the house.

Oh ptoey about not having trees between your house and yard. It's hot in Atlanta, you'll appreciate the shade. And why not enjoy the view of a mini forest and have some privacy. I'd underplant with beautiful flowering shrubs like some small azaleas or rhodies, and some flowering groundcover and be happy I didn't have so much lawn to mow during the hot summer. There are many understory trees and shrubs with varigated foliage too, for longer interest. I just planted a pagoda dogwood that was varigated, what a beautiful shrub. It's pushing it in your zone though. You could hire an arborist to come and evaluate your trees and see which ones were healthiest to leave and which ones to take out. Hard to tell from just the trunks.

While the spaces are adjoined, I think you have more or less two distinct landscape planting areas. One is at the foundation. The other is the perimeter ... though that has expanded to be quite thick on account of the slope, which is fine.

Like some of my colleagues, I have no problem with the trees or the slope. I don't even have a problem with the amount of trees. To me, they look like a uniformly well spaced family of objects. The only thing I have a problem with is the low canopy, because it obscures too much of the house ... as though it's trying to create privacy, but failing. It's a bit like hair covering the eyes. I'd rather see the lower portion of the canopy lifted so that from the road we could begin to see more of the house. Since a person would usually be moving when they view the house, all of the vertical trunks do not really impede the view all that much. It is the lower portions of the horizontal, low hanging canopy that impede the view. Now you can't just go in and raise the canopy to the finish point, considering that there are smaller trees mixed in. If you did that, the smallest trees might have naked trunks all the way up and 3 leaves at the top ... which would look totally ridiculous. But you are safe to remove lower limbs up to 50% of the total individual tree canopy height (the bottom half of tree.) Then the tree can still look reasonably normal. (This would give enough immediate relief from the problem, I think, that you would be satisfied that you're on the right path.) Within a short time after you've removed those limbs, the tree will add additional height, making it look even more well proportioned. Over a period of time, if you do this annually, you will be continuously raising the overall canopy until it stops obscuring the front of house. The canopy bottom will reach a finish point (where the house is exposed to your liking) so there will be no need to raise the canopy bottom higher. The only thing you will need to do is to occasionally remove overhead limbs that grow heavier and longer and begin hanging down into the space that you've designated to be clear-trunk space.

The other thing that bothers me about the perimeter planting (the forested area) is the extensive sea of pine straw mulch. While at the moment, being fresh and clean, it looks as good as a sea of pine straw possibly can, but we all know there will be a time coming later this year, and every year hence, where it will look tired and worn and in need of being covered with fresh mulch. What a pain! ... to say nothing of the expense. There is not ANY way I can look at this mulch and think it looks anywhere near as good as if it had been upholstered with a unified fabric of smooth, green groundcover. And for your area, there is no question in my mind that the groundcover best suited for the job is English ivy. I'm sure there is plenty of it already in the neighborhood. (BTW, I'm all for ditching the silly sliver of turf near the street. It makes no sense to me to have that there.) The maintenance for ivy is edging it and keeping it off the trees. Keeping it off the trees is merely a once-per-year effort where you cut what's growing up the trunks with a sharp blade. You don't even bother to remove it, but let it fall off on it's own, which it does in a relatively short time. With ivy, there is no leaf raking. It 'eats" leaves.

To my thinking, a general rule is that landscaping things only look good if they look like they make sense. If one creates something that looks pointless -- or like a person would never actually use it in the way it was intended -- then it can't LOOK good. I question the reasonableness of creating any walk path through the wooded slope. Looking at the terrain, it seems to be only getting steeper toward the left and is less steep toward the right, where the driveway is. I say this because the yard is level and the street is clearly sloping downhill toward the left. I can't see any way it makes sense to put a path from the house to the street at any place except next to the driveway. And to put it there would come down to a matter of how badly one wanted to have it versus how badly they didn't want to pay for it. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with making a well designed walk next to, or adjoining the drive, if one wants to make walking up/down the hill easier and doesn't mind paying for it. I would speculate that most people would think it not worth the trade off, preferring to pick up the mail from the car window. If a path would be primarily for guests, I'd say add a parking area or two up at the top and really make them happy.

If you're going to add any shrubs to the forested area, I would keep them massed and toward the left lot line, as they would begin to create a division of sorts in the view. I would not scatter them around the treed area, especially in a tombstone arrangement style.

Well, I think it is lovely as it is. I have no problem at all with low branches obscuring the house but then I come from a culture which has little concept of 'kerb appeal' and where privacy is highly valued commodity. The only thing I find a bit off putting is the uniform mulch. It looks sterile to me. Some ground cover here and there and maybe some azaleas or other spring flower understory shrubs would be nice. Its a lovely woodland garden. Why try to make it look like something else?

If you live in the Atlanta area, I'd recommend visiting Calloway Gardens to get inspiration for your woodland garden. If you remove the trees in Atlanta, you'll pay for it in air conditioning bills in the summer.

I would carefully and selectively prune some of your lower branches. As has been suggested, you can do this several years in a row until you get the look you are going for.

Shade in the south to me suggests azaleas, camellias, and/or hydrangeas (oakleaf in particular). You could also incorporate hostas, ferns, and other plants as well. You may get enough sunlight near the very front to have daylillies and hardy amaryllis. A mass of lower growing plants can in time make an effective groundcover. In your area a shade garden can provide interest 12 months a year. My yard has something in bloom almost constantly, even in winter.

I would avoid English Ivy. It is an agressive spreader that can take over an entire yard. I wouldn't personally want a mat of a single type of groundcover blanketing the entire front yard. You can trim it back a couple of times a year to keep it in check but it just seems very boring to me.

What are the shrubs growing in front of the house and how big will they get? I get an uncomfortable sense of contrast between the small-scale, low-height shrubs in front of the house and the large-scale (high-height) trees, making the front of the house seem cramped by comparison with the wooded area. What would you think about keeping the trees (maybe prune with a light hand) and adding some of the shrubs mentioned above to the woodland to add some intermediate height? Also expanding the bed in front of the house outward to allow more generous shrubs planted at a respectable distance from the house. That would mean redoing the walkway (make it generously proportioned) and that would cost, but how much would it cost relative to removing large trees?

Shade in the south is absolutely precious. I have a huge cottonwood that shades my house in the afternoon. And southern gardens benefit from partial shade, especially afternoon shade. It seems to have been cloudy when you took your photos, so perhaps more sun gets into the wooded area than I can see. However, trees also limit how well plants grow due to their shade and competition from their roots.

I see what bothers you about trees in a row, but from the street they do not have that tree farm look, so I think where they came up was chance. Since you have issues with them you might have an arborist look them over. The fact that they are spindly means they grew up close together, but they may all be quite healthy. You have to decide whether to thin out the trees. However, I would hate for you to remove the native dogwoods. Prune them to improve their health and appearance.

When I first answered your question it seemed you wanted easier access for people parked on the street. Therefore I suggested the stairs. I got a chance to play with this today, so here is a possible future access stairway. I replaced the grass strip with paving, so guests could step onto hard surface rather than mulch. The boulders are placed to slow runoff, and scattered rather than stacked.

Wow there has a been a ton of great feedback. Thanks everyone for your responses.

I really like the idea of trying to raise the canopy. That's something I can do and worst case I could still remove the tree a few years down the line if I need to. At least then I will have done everything to save it.

The sea of pine straw stays pretty fresh because of all the needles falling. I just have to keep up with keeping it clean by picking up branches and pine cones. I'm def not a fan of English Ivy though. It's all over the backyard and super invasive. I know it can look decent if managed, but for one reason or another people always seem to let it go.

I see what you're saying yardvaark about putting the stairs on the shallowest part of the slope. I guess I need to rethink my strategy there. Thanks for the mock up though mindshift. I see how to incorporate a landing in the stairs by making it part of a turn.

Based on the feedback I think I'm going to bring in an arborist, raise the canopy, and plant some woodland plants. Thanks for the Calloway Gardens tip whitewatervol. I've heard of it but have never been. I'll check it out to get some inspiration on what to plant.

Thanks again everyone

"I really like the idea of trying to raise the canopy. That's something I can do "

With a simple hand pole pruner, you can saw off all the low limbs and gather them up in fairly short order. If you must bundle them up for pick-up, begin at the tip end cutting them into the requisite lengths with loppers. Buy quality tools, especially loppers as they will need to hold up to a lot of abuse for this job.

"I'm def not a fan of English Ivy though. It's all over the backyard and super invasive. I know it can look decent if managed, but for one reason or another people always seem to let it go." Isn't it completely the people's choice to let it go or not? Let's put this in perspective. English ivy is capable of covering huge amounts of heavily shaded ground with a uniform, beautiful texture, where no grass will grow. It's a workhorse in that department. Imagine if it was grass instead, it would need to be mowed and edged every week all throughout the growing season. That's a fair amount of man-hours. But what do people do with ivy .... absolutely nothing, usually for years! At the end of that they say it's invasive and unmanageable! Ivy never needs height mowing so that's a huge time saver. Where it meets civilized conditions, it needs edging about once a month or at most every 2 weeks if one is very picky. It needs "edging" at trees, but as I already explained, that's a quick, easy job, required only once per year. It's fine to make a personal decision not to have ivy, but then one must accept one of the alternatives ... other plants that collectively require much more labor to maintain, or a dry, barren look of mulch alone.

If you bought a back yard that already has ivy, why not explore how to make it useful for you instead of thinking that it's the enemy and must be held in contempt or eradicated? It's already there so not a question of importing an "invasive" species. When I lived in Atlanta, English ivy (it was already there for me, too) was the plant that made having a nice yard in wooded conditions possible.

I would conceal the lower, open portion of the bay windows, as, "floating," they do not look architecturally strong. It is better to conceal them and let people imagine that they have supporting foundations.

I can't see the walk/house relationship well enough, but they do look too close to one another. I didn't show it relocated in the picture, but in the plan view below you can see how I would approach it. Since I think you could benefit by having a large-shrub-sized tree, I would make room for it at the foundation planting if the walk were to be redone.

While there is not much, if anything at all, you can do to exclude, or minimize, the house at right from the view, it seems you could easily screen the house at the left side. This would be a good thing to do in order to create an improved setting for your house.

As the homeowner, you spend more time looking out upon the woods than viewing from the street. Do you only care how motorists view your garden? I would rather selfishly care how it looked from the windows or standing at the front door.

I don't see the appeal of exchanging one sea of brown pine straw for another sea of green ivy. I agree that english ivy has a place. It's just not for me. I think breaking up the pine straw with some plants would be best. Thanks for earlier reminder to keep in mind to avoid the tombstone look. (Is this where mass platings can help?)

Thanks a bunch for the mock up of the front yardvaark. I wanted to redo the front bed anyway so your ideas are a big help. I think the front beds were redone just before I bought the house, (it's just two rows of bushes that are green most of the year) so the current shrubs are small. Rearranging them a bit to block the architecturally weak floating bay windows would look better. Then that leaves me room to add interest through different plants.

Agree emmarene that my view is probably more important. But I think there's some things I can do that will improve both views.

"I don't see the appeal of exchanging one sea of brown pine straw for another sea of green ivy."

I'm only answering for academic reasons, not to convince or change your view since what you ultimately do matters only to the people who will live with the result. The difference between mulch vs. groundcover could be subtle or profound, depending on circumstances, but mulch is dead, hard, flat, dry and often dull while a covering of plants is alive, serene, bright and cushioned. It's like comparing the appearance of stuffing of furniture to the finish fabric. They both define the exact same shape, but one surface seems attractive and one does not. If it were true that green groundcover has no appeal superior to mulch, then one should be willing to exchange one's lawn for mulch and save on the the mowing and edging maintenance. But I doubt anyone with a decent lawn would be interested in doing that. They would only do that for policy reasons, not for appearance.