Farmdale
European garden
Day + night studies
Prepared by Austin Archuleta
6506 Farmdale Lane, Austin, TX 78749
I have the Blender files to make adjustments and iterate on. The package retains 16 editable models: 8 baselines and 8 adaptations. These are concept studies; changing levels or footprints requires updated earthwork calculations.
Eight retained layouts, with additional European material adaptations and matching day/night images. The previous fixed-stone studies remain available. Tap any image to open it at full size.
Lighting note: day views use calculated June 21, 2026, 5 PM CDT sun direction with estimated elevated canopy. Brightness is illustrative. Garden views selectively clear foreground foliage; technical terrace views also hide woody shrubs to expose the interfaces. Shadows remain and no pruning is proposed. Separate full-canopy images retain context; no exact sun hours are established. Use the separate solar and canopy studies for those comparisons. Night views model darkness with existing Govee bed-light references and proposed path/pergola/table layers; fixture counts and light output are not surveyed.
Measured patio datum 0 in; O -16 in; gravel dot -26 in; low-path X -29.5 in. The beds follow the existing lawn slope with extra mulch. Intervening soil and proposed levels remain assumptions.
Existing garden: preserve its variety
Owner-confirmed inventory: Fig tree, Hibiscus, Nellie Stevens holly, Tulip magnolia. The rear beds, side beds and water-feature surroundings receive varied forms and heights, based on the photos and owner input. This is an approximate reconstruction, not a plant-by-plant survey or verified planting schedule.
Exact locations, counts, current sizes and cultivar details remain unverified. Visible flowers do not imply simultaneous bloom. The existing sloping bed soil is retained; plant height does not mean raised soil or a need for a blanket retaining wall. Keep the patio clear and verify specimens before any removal, transplanting, new root-zone work or irrigation changes.
Material key
F uses limestone dining/bench pads, timber seating/storage, dark supports, retained lawn and stone path, and a thin shredded hardwood mulch cover in the sloped planted garden. Mulch is not the preferred low-mess toddler/dog surface and is not certified playground surfacing. The European palette restores pea gravel beside large pavers; loose material can shift and track.
| Material | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Natural lawn | Healthy central turf retained in every option. B restores more grass; C/E add selective connections. Shade performance remains uncertain. |
| Buff limestone | New pale pads and paving. Large formal pavers define furniture and busy walking areas. Paver arrangement, base and joints require construction specifications. |
| Pale pea gravel | Rounded 6-10 mm concept gravel, visually flush within stone containment. It can shift and track; not DG, stabilized aggregate or guaranteed drainage. |
| Existing stone | Photo-informed slate/flagstone patio and curved path. Actual thickness, condition and reusable quantities unknown. |
| Timber + dark metal | C deck boards; seating/storage and grill-adjacent details. Timber species, weathering finish, structure and supports unselected. |
| Shredded hardwood mulch | F open shaded zone and planted beds: untreated hardwood mulch, thin visual top-up over existing soil. Not certified playground surfacing. |
| Planted beds | Mixed existing planting informed by owner inventory: fig, hibiscus, Nellie Stevens holly and tulip magnolia. Exact positions, sizes, irrigation and any new planting need verification. |
| Cover / grill / water | Louvered pergola, generic grill island, trellis/planters and optional water features. Product ratings, services, foundations and clearances unresolved. |
Read depth before choosing levels
Orange means surface cut; blue means surface fill, except in C where blue is open air beneath the deck. Pale green plan areas locate approximate beds; dots locate T1-T4 trunk centers, not roots. Gray locates the retained path. Green lines are assumed soil; the dashed underside tests a 6-inch paving/base assembly. These are separate scenarios, not additive quantities. Only the defined pads are calculated.
No root exclusions, wall foundations, drainage trenches, stripping, bulking, compaction or construction access. The +/-6-inch soil test is a sensitivity illustration, not a confidence range. Actual path ties are unmeasured.
Property, orientation and seasonal shade
Official City GIS identifies parcel 0416380617, Austin Full Purpose, SF-2 and FloodPro Zone X. Mapped easement and overlay intersections still require project-specific verification. See the report and source records.
Connected foliage includes overlapping neighboring crowns. These projections do not establish direct-sun hours, lawn success, root protection or permitted pruning. Validate heights and shade in the yard.
Corrected high canopy: summer versus winter
Your observations take precedence over the earlier low opaque canopy model. The owner reports direct afternoon sun in the front-left area year-round, and consistently filtered light under canopy in the back-right area. These are owner-view labels, not verified compass or plan coordinates. The high crown allows some sun beneath it; lower winter sun lies farther south behind the house. Exact hours, heights and the neighboring roof horizon remain unmeasured.
Photo-informed house estimates: low eave 8.2 ft / ridge 13.9 ft; two-story eave 19.8 ft / ridge 24.2 ft. Canopy underside scenarios near the patio: about 20, 26 or 33 ft, each with illustrative 10 ft foliage depth. The real crown is irregular; these are sensitivity scenarios, not measured confidence bounds. Live-oak foliage is retained in winter; spring leaf replacement can change density (City plant guide). The individual visual trees follow the photographed bends and branch hierarchy above unchanged bases; no uniform upward stretching is used. No pruning or tree-protection approval is implied.
For two Great Pyrenees and a 3-year-old
Preserve the European pea-gravel and large-stone direction while concentrating stable paving under furniture and busy routes. Rounded loose gravel can move and track; it does not meet a literal mess-free brief. Keep mulch in planted beds; F remains a garden comparison, not the preferred low-mess play surface. Product heat, wet slip, drainage, paw tracking and root impacts still need selection and field checks.
Actual canopy photo evidence
These photos show irregular crowns, overlap and sky openings; the owner reports September 17, 2026, around 7:45 PM CDT (not EXIF-verified). Calculated sun elevation is -2.9 degrees: twilight structure and sky gaps cannot establish direct-sun hours. Camera bearings and crown heights remain unmeasured.
Retained baselines and material families
Open the previous fixed-stone gallery. V3 A/B/D/E/G/H remain stable-stone references. V4 adds contained pea-gravel/formal-stone adaptations. Timber C and planted F retain their distinct material roles, so their day/night views do not imply entirely new layouts.
Rounded 6-10 mm concept gravel is contained by narrow stone bands. Furniture stays on stone, with 0.35 m chair buffers and 0.15 m other-furniture buffers where possible, plus an approximately 0.9 m within-pad corridor; actual clearances require checking. Compact E/F/G dining pads remain fully stone. C/E/F use gravel only in existing fountain catchments; D upper court and H extension stay stone.
Other surface materials to sample
| Natural limestone | Strong garden character; stable units beneath furniture. Select texture and cleaner carefully; test wet grip, staining and surface heat. Base and joint system control movement and runoff. |
|---|---|
| Textured concrete pavers | Consistent modular units with several tones/textures. Joints, edge restraint and base require maintenance/design; compare actual wet samples and summer heat rather than assuming a cool surface. |
| Exterior porcelain pavers | Some exterior products offer tested grip and stain resistance. Specify the exact outdoor product and installation; not all porcelain has the same rating. Hot surfaces, joint lippage and unsupported edges still need review. |
| Resin-bound aggregate | Aggregate mixed throughout resin can retain a gravel-like appearance with fewer loose particles. Distinct from resin-bonded scatter coats. Permeability depends on the complete base; verify local installer, UV system, wet grip, cleaning and repairs. |
| Timber / deck boards | A warm raised surface as in C. Manage gaps, splinters, algae and finish upkeep; supports and framing clearance remain major constraints. Open air below a deck is not fill. |
| Rounded pea gravel | Keeps the European gravel garden character. More particle movement/tracking and harder chair support than fixed surfaces; contain it and use stable stone at furniture and busy routes. Not a verified fall-protection material. |
| Clay brick pavers | A warm formal-garden option for a terrace, path or border. Use paving-grade units with even tops and restrained edges. Joint settlement and leaf/algae buildup affect footing; choose texture, joints and the complete base for the actual site. |
| Composite deck boards | An alternative finish for the raised C structure, not a gravel replacement. Can reduce refinishing but still needs cleaning. Check exact board spacing, supports, thermal movement, wet grip and paw/claw marks. Even heat-mitigating products can become hot in direct sun. |
Product-specific grip, heat, cleaning and installation need checking. Root impacts depend on the entire base and support system. This comparison does not create additional layout variants.
Belgard porcelain · SureSet resin-bound/bonded distinction · BIA brick paving · Trex heat guidance · Trex cleaning
Existing Govee lights: retain and reuse
These actual nighttime photos show perimeter planting and tree accents, with darker lawn and path intervals. Preserve the existing bed uplights where practical; proposed path, pergola and table lights are a separate addition. Exact fixture count, aiming, output, controls and wiring are unmeasured. Photo exposure cannot establish lux or glare.
Materials in matching day and night views
The first five comparisons use Option B; timber and composite use Option C. Geometry and trial levels stay fixed within each family. Appearance is illustrative, with no selected-product grip, heat, cleaning or installation approval.
Limestone and contained pea gravel
Porcelain core and contained pea gravel
Concrete core and contained pea gravel
Clay paver core and contained pea gravel
Resin-bound core and contained pea gravel
Timber deck reference
Composite deck appearance
Existing side passage and continuous route
Actual photos show the broader flagstone walk, a separate rounded river-rock border and distinct paving beneath the woodpile/storage area. Preserve these distinctions. The side-passage render and chart tail use an assumed 36-inch width beyond the proposed pads, not a measured dimension. Pad footprints and quantities are unchanged. Widths, local levels and hidden edges need field measurement; these photographs are not a surveyed path footprint.
Full canopy from the lawn
Shared house and roof after dark
Retain/reuse existing Govee bed uplights where practical. Proposed warm, shielded path, pergola and table lights supplement them. Verify controls, glare, route visibility and root-aware wiring. No measured lux or electrical construction design is supplied.
A / Refined firm layout
Two gathering terraces with lawn, cover and optional water features; revised paving stops before the visible existing stone path.
Trial finishes: lounge -16 in; dining -22 in.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Formal limestone furniture core with rounded pea-gravel margins, narrow stone containment, planted beds and restrained mulch.
Why compare it: Separate dining and conversation spaces.
Develop next: More hardscape and soil interfaces. Tree symbol 02 falls inside the upper footprint; its root conflict is unresolved.
Edging / support: Two level pads cut into uphill soil and rise above lower soil. Resolve both perimeter interfaces; tree 02 lies inside the upper footprint. Do not excavate that conflict as drawn.
B / Continuous lawn + one dining pad
The hard divider between the lawn areas is removed. A low mowing edge follows the outside of the continuous lawn.
Trial dining finish: -22 in. Upper lawn follows assumed existing ground.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Natural lawn; flush limestone perimeter edge; formal limestone furniture core with contained pea-gravel margins.
Why compare it: Simpler circulation and a larger visually connected lawn.
Develop next: The extra grass remains a shade-performance experiment; the remaining pad still needs roots and grades checked.
Edging / support: A lawn mowing border belongs around the outside, not between the connected grass areas. The dining pad still needs uphill cut-edge and downhill support details.
C / Linked deck + planted tree beds
A timber route is shifted north of the existing path to reach patio-level dining. Added lawn connects to the center; shaped beds define the tree zone.
Deck finish: patio datum 0 in. Existing slope remains below.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Timber deck unchanged; gravel accent only in an existing fountain catchment, never spread below the deck. Lawn, planted beds and retained stone path.
Why compare it: A connected family surface without treating the entire air gap as imported fill.
Develop next: The near-patio framing intersects assumed ground. Support locations, structural details, access below and low-path connection remain unresolved.
Edging / support: Deck perimeter is an elevated structural edge or near-ground framing conflict, not imported fill. Engineer supports, walking transitions and any required edge protection.
D / One connected seating court
Lounge and dining share one trial elevation, removing their internal step.
Trial finish: -18 in. Tree opening retains assumed existing soil.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Upper court stays full limestone around the graphic tree opening; dining has a limestone furniture core and contained gravel margins. Lawn and path remain.
Why compare it: A larger continuous gathering area with fewer internal transitions.
Develop next: A smaller step count does not remove perimeter retaining or root concerns. The 0.9 m graphic tree opening is not a protection prescription.
Edging / support: One finish removes the step between gathering areas, not the need to support outer edges. The graphic tree opening is not a root protection limit; preserve measured tree soil.
E / Small pads + lawn and beds
Compact dining and conversation pads sit within a planted shaded edge. Lawn connects to the center and paving stops short of the stone path.
Trial finishes: dining -21 in; conversation -14 in.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Both compact pads stay limestone; gravel accents are limited to existing fountain catchments. Natural lawn, planted beds and retained path.
Why compare it: Concentrates level construction where furniture needs it, preserving more existing slope.
Develop next: Small pads still need root-aware base construction and safe walking connections. Grass extension is selective, not a guarantee of shade tolerance.
Edging / support: Each small pad has its own cut/fill interface. Use planted sloping ground between pads; avoid turning every garden border into a footing trench.
F / Planted shade garden + family pads
Compact dining, bench and storage meet an informal shaded garden surfaced with shredded hardwood mulch.
Trial finishes: dining -21 in; bench landing -14.5 in. Open mulch zone stays sloped.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Compact dining and bench landing remain stone; gravel is limited to existing contained fountain catchments. Planted mulch garden, lawn and timber seating remain.
Why compare it: Provides family dining and a bench landing beside retained central lawn; the open mulched area is a garden.
Develop next: Loose mulch can track on paws and clothes. This is not the preferred toddler/dog surface, a level playground or certified impact-attenuating surfacing.
Edging / support: Retain or feather the dining and bench-pad edges as verified. Thin mulch over unchanged garden soil needs material containment, not a new blanket retaining wall.
G / Linear lounge + garden pockets
A long bench-focused lounge and compact dining pad create destinations beside the retained lawn and shaded planting.
Trial finishes: linear lounge -15 in; dining -21 in. Dining paving stops before the retained path.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Dining stays stone; linear lounge gains contained gravel beside its stone furniture core. Timber bench, planted mulch beds, lawn and retained path.
Why compare it: Uses a narrower gathering shape and preserves substantial ground between destinations.
Develop next: Bench supports, routes, fence-side constraints, pad edges and roots need coordination; this is not a continuous retaining-wall bench.
Edging / support: The linear lounge and dining pad each need checked transitions. A seating bench is not automatically a structural retaining wall; coordinate footings separately.
H / Patio extension + shade nook
A compact patio-level bench extension adds a spot beside the house, with a separate shade nook. Main family dining stays on the covered patio.
Trial finishes: extension 0 in; nook -15 in. Extension stops short of the retained path.
Compare the retained v3 baseline
Whole garden
Seating and materials
Lawn, beds and edges
Lower-window view
Upper-window view
From the covered patio
Along the retained stone path
Continuous route from the far end
Materials: Patio extension stays full limestone; only the nook gains a contained gravel margin beside its stone core. Timber, umbrella, lawn, beds and path remain.
Why compare it: A convenient bench stop near the covered patio, with a smaller remote seating destination.
Develop next: The extension is partly above existing ground, so its support/edge and runoff need design. Preserve useful lawn and resolve each route.
Edging / support: The patio-level extension can need support over falling ground. Check its outer edge and the lower nook separately; keep tree and bed soil at existing levels.
Conditional edge depths
Finish minus assumed soil, in inches. Negative is exposed uphill soil; positive is a raised edge. C is air clearance. These are not designed wall heights.
| A | Dining -6.67 to +1.67; lounge -6.06 to +1.49 | Two trial levels, 6 in apart. |
|---|---|---|
| B | Dining -6.67 to +1.67 | Lawn perimeter is a mowing edge, not a new terrace. |
| C | Connector +1.33 to +15.75; dining +15.34 to +23.67 | Deck air clearance, not fill or a retaining-wall height. |
| D | Dining -2.67 to +5.67; lounge -8.06 to -0.51 | No internal level change; perimeter and tree opening remain. |
| E | Dining -4.82 to +1.46; lounge -3.69 to +1.56 | Separate small destinations on retained slope. |
| F | Dining -4.82 to +1.46; bench -3.92 to +0.60 | Mulched garden follows existing ground. |
| G | Dining -4.82 to +1.46; lounge -4.41 to +0.93 | Bench supports require their own root-aware design. |
| H | Extension +1.30 to +7.54; nook -4.41 to +0.85 | Extension support can matter despite a small footprint. |
Continuous route and terrace interfaces
The existing stone path remains the continuous far-end-to-patio route. New pads stop short of it; exact pad/path connections, widths and local levels need measurement. Terrace finish elevations use the patio datum. Exposed cut/support faces use adjoining soil at the same location; they are not the same measurement.
Keep bed and tree-base soil at existing levels. No blanket bed raising or new tree wells is inferred. T1-T4 are traced trunk-center references, not root boundaries. The neutral backdrop is presentation only; neighboring roof horizon and path tie-in elevations are unmeasured.