So you want 2 to 3 trees that'll stretch over a 60-70' long row & be tall enough to shade a 2-story house many years down the road but have a narrow enough canopy and root field to plant 15-20' from the house? I assume you don't want branches raking the house, or to prune them off of it, so a crown width of 30' would be about your max., right? But the tree needs to be as tall or taller than a 2-story house.

I'll be interesting to know what people come up with. I've only gotten the tree bug the past few months, so my input is pretty limited. Some basic thoughts:

1.) Have you considered some of the tighter columnar form maples (I read a recent post asking about Newton Sentry Sugar Maple, for example)? I've seen columnar maples of modest size along highways; not enthused with the look compared to the majestic Sugar Maples of our area (Western KY, Zone 6), but with your constraints, this might be workable.

2.) Is it important for you to have deciduous trees that let the light in during winter? Some holly trees have a tall, columnar form from what I'd heard.

3.) Is Emerald Ash Borer a potential threat in your area? I've read a bit on that issue, and I wouldn't plant an ash tree, period, much less a Green Ash Tree, if that was a factor.

4.) You mention the trees will be between 2 houses, at least one of which is a 2-story. Will they get full sun, partial sun or what?

5.) Define 'well-behaved' roots. A maple with a shallow root system might not be conducive to a golf green-style lawn, for example. Or is your concern large surface roots to trip over, or that the side-walk or foundation might be threatened?

6.) The only way I know to shade a 2-story house from mid-day sun is to have a very tall tree with a broad crown growing up close to the house. If you don't want leaves & branches raking the foundation, you'd need a tall, naked trunk, with branches & leaves starting way up high. Got a feeling there's going to be some compromise along the way here.

These answers might help folks figure out what will meet your needs.

drrich's questions & points are good ones, some are not relevant to that climate.

However, a 35-45 ft shade tree 12 ft from the house is a recipe for conflicts. You will have higher maintenance costs (pruning, roof repair [shading and moss], gutter cleaning or prevention, foundation concerns, and where is the water & sewer line [if it is on that side of the house, fuhgeddaboudit]). It's likely you'll want to install root barriers on that side of the house if you decide to go with a medium-sized tree or two.

You will also want to think about solar access easements as well, as it is likely they will be enacted in your area in the next decade.

The other thing you have to consider is that the water - temperature regime is changing there and you'll need a little more adaptable tree (adaptable to less water and higher temps).

Dan

Drrich and Dan,
Thanks for your questions. Things to think about. Let me try to answer your questions.

Deciduous is important for the winter heat from the sun.

Don't know of any problems with Ash borer but I'd have to look into that before choosing and Ash for sure.

Roots concern: I don't need to have lawn under it but don't want big roots to trip over. I also don't want roots that seek out sewer lines as the sewer line runs somewhere within 25' of there. (my understanding is that some trees are more likely to do this)

Locale and sewer line concern: My house is over a hundred years old and many trees have been planted around it during its life -- big birch in my neighbor's yard to the North & two lindens as current street trees to the East are examples. So, I hope that it isn't impossible to add more new trees without destroying the sewer line -- correct me if I'm wrong on that and it's just categorically unworkable. We did have the sewer line checked a year ago with video (before buying the place) and so we know it is currently in great shape.

Solar easement concern. Though the trees I'm thinking about would shade the north side of my neighbor's yard, they would not shade the house until/unless they were really huge - and even then because of the angle of the sun, not so much. Dan, do you know what solar easements usually cover -- since I am to the north of the neighbor and my shade will fall mostly all on my yard. I am interested to know more about this if you can tell me.

I'll keep the water/temp. changes in mind.

The canopy size & roof question. I'm not opposed to a tree that has to have branches pruned back until at a height to clear the roof (at which time I would be who-knows-where but perhaps alive and still here - I'm 35).

The necessary extra roof care is a reasonable expense to pay for the added comfort of summer shade so I do plan that the roof/moss/gutters would need extra maintenance which I would have done.

That help? More questions/concerns? suggestions?

Thanks,
Lex

Planting that close to the house, I'd suggest something with a narrower profile or canopy. The recommendation of one of the columnar maples is appropriate - 'Armstrong' is a great choice and with good fall color. Or a columnar European hornbeam - small leaves, golden fall color, relatively pest and disease free. As far as ashes go, I'd consider using our native ash, Fraxinus latifolia. Or for a finer texture and more intense fall color, Raywood ash, Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'. Both have relatively narrow crowns, given their height.

Personally, I'd skip the chestnut (it needs a pollinator to produce nuts) and the Liriodendron -- it will just get too big for your purposes.

Gardengal,

Thanks for those suggestions. I have the raywood ash in mind and will look up the others.

You're right that Tulip tree gets huge and wouldn't fit when it was that big. I am used to seeing them next to 4-story academic buildings, quite a different context from my yard.

How's your garden growing? We've traded plants before haven't we?

Thanks,
Lex

Not plants but likely posts on the NW Gardening forum :-) And I have a new (to me!) garden that I am just getting to know and start to personalize. No room for any more trees, unfortunately, but lots of opportunities to develop a great NW shade garden.

Gardengal,

yes, I guess that's it. I always enjoy your posts.

What do you think of the cimmaron ash? Too big for my purpose?

Lex

Upright Freeman maple cultivars are an obvious possibility, visit nearby commercial developments to see some of these farther down the road, decide if they look like the kind of thing you have in mind. Other kinds of upright-growing shade trees will also be present in nearby malls etc. Taking leaves on any you like to good local independent garden centers may result in useful suggestions of what these might be. You might even find the same tree(s) for sale at the same time you are there.

'Frans Fontaine' might be a possibility but otherwise avoid upright hornbeams, the much longer- and more widely planted 'Fastigiata' is not really fastigiate at all, forming a broad specimen after some years.

And many in plantings up here become covered in sooty mold fungus over summer.

Caucasian ash cultivars planted on Seattle streets have turned out to be prone to forming narrow crotches which eventually split, after the specimen may be big enough to do some damage.

American ash produces a quite big tree. And emerald ash borer is hammering it in the vicinity of the Great Lakes. We do not know if its currently expanding range will eventually include our region.

If you are in/near Portland the main publicly accessible, labeled tree collection is the Hoyt Arboretum in Washington Park. Note that as of the last time I was there - and walked around much - although labeling was quite visible and thorough many specimens had sometimes ridiculously wrong identifications. At the visitor center I was told everything had been labeled according to where it was on a map - apparently with no regard to what it looked like.

The much newer Flora Wonder Arboretum, at the Buchholz wholesale nursery near Gaston is supposed to contain over 4,000 kinds of plants. I have not been there yet, do know emphasis is on conifers but other kinds are present as well. A friend was there recently, and somebody else mentioned having gone there on this web site awhile back - so it may be more or less publicly accessible.

The Oregon Garden, near Silverton - based on what was once said the facility was supposed to offer - should have become a great place to see trees for garden use demonstrated but instead seems to have been given over largely to extensive and rather odd formal effects - often with only a small number of kinds of plants used. When a couple of us were there awhile back we did see a few trees that interested us enough to ask at the information desk about them. Incredibly, we were told nobody was keeping records of the tree plantings there. So we left without being given the most basic information.

For an article by a local tree expert...

Here is a link that might be useful: Trees that merit planting in Seattle

Thanks BBoy,

I'm in Salem - 45 miles South of Portland. Basically same conditions. We have a very small arboretum here at Bush's Pasture Park, also often incorrectly labeled as well. I guess I should volunteer to work on correcting that some day.

I'll look at the hornbeam you mention although pretty much decided that it is a bit too formal a look. I like to do formal things at the smaller scale and then have looser larger elements.

Interesting that you mention development and mall trees. I usually dislike the choices but understand the need for the narrow shape in those contexts. I'll keep an eye out for nicer ones.

I have been to the oregon garden several times. Has some interesting things but mostly way too many annuals for my taste. And, as you say, very formal areas which to me didn't hold together very well. They're struggling to make it -- too bad.

I haven't read the link you gave yet but I will.
Thanks,
Lex

People involved with Bush's park have had the guy who wrote the article linked to above down there once or twice to work on labeling. By now I would expect most specimens there with signs on them would be correct, I think he has pretty much covered the whole collection (of trees).

I have been there several times myself, the trees that come readily to my mind as being of particular interest are the Acer cappadocicum 'Aureum', the Crataegus schraderiana and the C. pinnatifidia major. Being told about this last was what drew me to the park originally. I didn't know I would also see a bunch of other stuff there.

BBoy,

So glad to hear of these trees to look for at Bush's park. I guess that I've only seen one or two mislabeled and then many more without labels -- so I overgeneralized. No complaints about this anyway, I recognize that these parks get limited funding and they are such a valuable resource to me, perfectly labeled or not.

I'll look around for the trees you mentioned when I'm there next, tomorrow or the next day.

Lex

Another upright one seen on streets here is Malus tschonoskii. Not a spectacle in flower but I think its flowers are kind of interesting. Silvery leaves turn red and orange in fall. There is some fruit litter, but not heaps of it.

For some other kinds, including upright ones...

Here is a link that might be useful: Crabapples for Western Washington Landscapes - eb1809