Shop Products
Houzz Logo Print
sarah80_gw

ringing property with mixed trees instead of straight rows of eve

Sarah80
9 years ago

My husband and I just closed on a nice building lot. It's 3 acres, and there is not a single tree on this lot, so we have a blank slate. We won't be building until next spring.

We're looking to do a lot of different things within the yard over time, but our first idea is to "encircle" the property with trees for privacy. Yes, we know it will take some years for them to grow to this size.

Here's the general idea. Instead of straight lines of arborvitaes along the property line, which everyone seems to do, we're looking for something softer, and more natural. Mixed species, some evergreen, some deciduous trees. Native or not is less important, but we're looking for a mix of trees that can blend well and look semi-natural but not too ragged or wild, either. Almost like being surrounded by woods, but choosing our own trees and having at least some control.

I've posted before about our various ideas, but the land we ended up getting is in Licking County, OH Granville/Newark area.

Soil is a clay loam, pH 6.3, average fertility (DH has the actual results in his email).

The land is sloping, and the east and north sides are quite moist, sometimes wet. The west and south side is drier and higher.

What types of trees would you use for this type of project? We'd like good fall color and at least an average growth rate but I realize beggars can't be choosers!

Here are some trees we came up with:

Drier part of yard:
Scarlet Oak
Eastern White Pine
Norway Spruce
Sugar Maple
Arborvitae (We're OK with some just not a straight row)

Wetter/Moister area:
Swamp White Oak
Red Maple
Bald Cypress
Pin Oak
Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)

In-between areas:
Tuliptree
Elms (Chinese or disease resistant American like Valley Forge)
White Oak
Red Oak

We also want to have smaller. understory trees near the edge of the denser trees around the perimeter, like redbuds and dogwoods...

I'm open to suggestions.

Does this even make sense?

Comments (5)

  • Sarah80
    Original Author
    9 years ago

    Here's an example of the effect we're looking for (it's a big picture, so I'll just link it):

    Here is a link that might be useful: {{gwi:43657}}

  • hairmetal4ever
    9 years ago

    I love the idea, but am not one to really be able to design it properly.

    I'd recommend a landscape architect. Not a landscapER, AKA some dude with a chainsaw, a shovel, a truck, and a lawnmower...I mean, a landscape ARCHITECT. Someone who will draw up blueprints for you.

  • lazy_gardens
    9 years ago

    That's a great idea! It's not any harder than the boring row of stuff.

    However, before you plant anything, get your house sited and plans drawn up so you know which areas will need evergreens for privacy or wind break, which sides could use deciduous for passive solar heat and cooling, which windows could use a pretty fall color specimen and/or spring bloomers.

    Don't worry about species and varieties yet - think FUNCTION! On your plans, just call it "Spring bloomer", "view blocker all year", "patio shader".

    Use multiples of each species in a group for backgrounds, with an occasional specimen tree.

  • woodyoak zone 5 southern Ont., Canada
    9 years ago

    Ditto what lazy gardens said re house siting and plans etc. When you get to the point of selecting which trees to use,the folks on the Tree Forum are very helpful.

  • PRO
    Yardvaark
    9 years ago

    It sounds like you want to emulate a natural wooded state, but cleaned up since real nature is a bit messy and brutal. (If you were to walk through a half mile of it where I live, you'd emerge from the other side a bloody, tattered mess!) But the edge of nature -- a lot of foliage -- always looks pretty good so it's a perfect default. However, I don't see the only alternative as "a boring row of trees." There are many more options in terms of creating art out of plants and space. Imagine someone speaking to Michelangelo and claiming how much better that block of stone would be if he'd just leave it alone and appreciate it's natural beauty. They would certainly have a point because a big rock is a beautiful thing. But interestingly enough, when he ignores the advice and carves it into something, the the vast majority of other people think so highly of the altered block of stone, that they would build an expensive building just to house it. And many more (collectively) would pay millions of dollars designing their vacation around visiting that block of stone ... for all eternity.

    This is speculation, but I find it to be almost universally true so predict it will be the case here. When you build your house, Sarah, I bet you'll want almost nothing to do with raw nature and prefer that every square inch of it is manufactured to exacting specifications, milled, polished, sanitized, made of materials from exotic lands ("this counter top came from granite mined in Argentina," etc.) and microclimate controlled down to the degree of temperature and percentage of humidity. I am not criticizing either choice about what a person views as "beautiful." I'm merely pointing out the rather common contradiction in thinking that most people hold. I think it's true that if a person cannot envision the Pieta in a block of stone, they are much more likely to claim that the natural rock is far superior. While they will definitely be right about its being beautiful, they will not necessarily be right about it's being the best that could have been.

    If I was contemplating what kind of trees could go on this size of property, in addition to the more commonly available choices, I'd add some of those oddball trees that have distinct and outstanding features and be willing to put up with their bad habits ... like dropping fruit. On three acres, some messes that trees make do not necessarily need to be cleaned up if the trees are organized that way ... trees not normally used in suburban landscapes: osage orange, black walnut, etc. And if the only way I could obtain them was starting from seed, that would be OK, too. Such trees usually grow much faster than one would suspect. Also, in addition to dogwoods and redbuds, many of the plants usually used as large shrubs, are smalls trees if allowed to grow into adulthood. I would mine some from that category, too.