Hmmm. The ultimate reductionist landscape theory? Less is less in this case. You reduce the Miracle Mile's (best? isn't that subjective?) landscapes to boxes with x's and we have no connection to the beauty produced by nature as manipulated by man. Sure would have been instructive (as well as lovely) if you had included some photographs to illustrate your charts.

It would seem you have a fascination with patterns. Take a close look at a pineapple, just for fun. And maybe a coning cycad. Or the seeds in the center of a nice big sunflower. Fibonacci.

Why does your plan title indicate "residential" gardens when the models were taken from commercial sites? I think I get it, but adapting a 4 type plant scheme from a store front planting strip to my 2/3 or so acre would leave me wanting.

Heavy use of annuals. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Wm. Shakespeare

Catkim: Yeah, the residential and commercial point was a good one, there was a heavy use of annuals. I was assuming that commercial landscapes would carry over to residential, but that is too huge of a assumption/leap to make.

Duluth: You are right, those designs probably wouldn't be scalable to 2/3 of an acre. I put residential design to suggest 'small', but we all don't have small yards. The "best" designs is indeed subjective but I included around 12 designs and left out around 4 or 5 - I have even forgotten why I discarded some designs...I know some plots had props like rocks, art, and chimes. But I agree, to avoid confusion or disagreement and provide a better insight I need photos.

Thanks guys. Very good advice and critique.

It looks like a basic "filler/thriller/spiller" container design to me. Containers are often planted with annuals because they are usually changed out for seasonal interest.