In the front yard are roses, azaleas, two small, tiny-leaved rhodies, a 20' Mountain Ash volunteer, and a 25' Birch volunteer. The Mountain Ash needs to go, and probably the birch.

The side yard is the 100x50 piece to the North of the house. There's an Oregon Myrtle, 20-30 feet tall, in the NE corner. There's a Dawn Redwood right smack in the middle. Between the Dawn Redwood and the garage is a Colorado Blue Spruce. The door from the kitchen opens onto a small porch; directly in front of the steps is a large camellia tree, with the Dawn Redwood directly north of it.

I think the Dawn Redwood, Spruce, and Camellia are in the wrong places, but the trees are too big to move now, and the camellia provides a bit of shade in the afternoon. I cannot figure out what to do with this side yard.

I'd like to turn the front yard into a cottage garden, and move most of the roses to the side yard, next to the arborvitae hedge.

The city planted trees in the parking strip in front of the house. The northern-most is a Linden. It's too close to the Oregon Myrtle, but it looks like the Oregon Myrtle is winning. To the south is a young Red Oak. It's barely a sapling now, but it will get huge; I drew the lines to show it's mature size. The south-most is a Green Ash.

Is there a way for me to make a little shady, wooded area in the side yard and help to integrate the Dawn Redwood into an overall scheme, so that it doesn't look like it's plopped in the middle?

As for the backyard and the transition to the side yard, I'd like to add 2-4 more fruit or nut trees and some vegetable beds.

To make matters worse, previous owners surrounded the Dawn Redwood with a circle of heavy granite rocks. They could be useful elsewhere, but they are too heavy for me to move. They had similarly planted a circle of rocks in the front yard and planted an ordinary maple in the middle. I took down the maple and am moving the rocks bit by bit, as I have strength. They are not quite so big.

Isabella, do you or anyone else have suggestions on how I can work with the Dawn Redwood in place? I hate to cut it down.

Rain2Fall

Also how much of the lawn is used for activity? I am not sure from your plan view drawing where the DRW is but it appears that is could be used to act as part of a "garden wall" to subdivide the yard with a garden bed. As Woody as suggested additional planting around the DRW would provide more interest. It looks like a long view axis could be created to the right of treee to the far side of the yard.

(For those of you who hate the design forum; THIS IS JUST A JOKE. It is a not so subtle reference to another design forum thread and in no way is meant as an insult towards Rain2fall or his redwood.)

But I really would love to see a photo. Seems like part of the problem might be that anything you plant now will never catch up in size enough to the redwood to be proportional or serve to anchor it rather than having it stick out like a sore thumb. I love the "primitive plants" vignette idea, but perhaps those of you outside my area could share how a gingko would grow in proportion to a redwood? Gingkos grow rather slowly here.

I would say that just because something is already there and old doesn't mean it needs to stay, and in my view the Redwood is probably more of an obstruction to a good plan than a benefit. I would also not appreciate the Umbellularia californica tree in my own garden; they are dirty messy greedy surface rooting trees prone to getting lots of sucking insects that then create sooty mold on the leaves, and so densely shading and efficient at sucking up all water in the surface soil that they are difficult to garden under. I prefer to see them in habitat growing next to creeks along with the Coast Live Oaks and Big Leaf Maples, where I don't have to garden around them. I am sure they have more significance further north where they are less common and better appreciated as a relatively winter hardy evergreen broadleaf tree for winter interest, but here in the SF Bay Area, it is most often considered a weed tree, as they volunteer everywhere in local gardens here.

As to the OP's original request for help, I would further define what you want to do with the garden in terms of space and function, and work backwards as to how those functions and their requirements necessitate changes to the garden. If growing more fruit trees and a sunny area for vegetables is important, it would seem you don't have enough clear/large sunny areas not impacted by trees and cast shadows, as well as tree roots impacting what you can easily grow. I'd probably root out the trees that I don't love and/or need too much water to look good and/or get lots of attacking insects when drought stressed(thinking about the white birch in particular here).

Do you think lighter or darker small shrubs underneath would work better in your yard?

I'd like a vegetable & fruit tree garden in the back yard with more fruit/nut trees, which means taking down the Hawthorne, which is now about 40-50 feet high, and removing some of the holly hedge, which screens from a too-close neighbor.

On the north Side Yard, I'd like a shady place to sit, a deck, and a kitchen addition, which means taking out the old camellia. Maybe grapes above the deck, for summer shade and fruit, yet winter sun.

The Oregon Myrtle is full grown, about 30 feet high, and a gumdrop shape. It screens from the neighbors. I'm thinking of filling in the corner with blueberries and roses, and a piece of sunny lawn. The Oregon Myrtle isn't very weedy here; the ground underneath is paved with rectangular cement paving blocks.

I'd like a shady area to sit and enjoy a small woodsy area. The Dawn Redwood is about 30 feet high. Perhaps I could add to the Spruce - Dawn Redwood area by planting birches and even another conifer or two? I'm stumped.

Here's my DRAFT "Dream Plan". Will it work?

Cottage garden style garden beds are not my personal taste, but I'd suggest you look around your neighborhood for good planting combinations of things that work well in your area. I might recommend looking at the web site for Annie's Annuals here in California for some great photos of cottage garden style plantings, and maybe give you some ideas of color and texture combinations, see www.anniesannuals.com and look at the display garden photos.

Maybe the conifer section of the garden could be supplemented with medium tall woodland shrubs for bloom and fall color underplanted with ferns, and such. Enkianthus, Fothergilla, Stachyurus, Edgeworthia, Stewartia, Rhus typhina, Ribes sanguineum, dwarf Japanese Maples and some Viburnum species all make great woodland plants for fall color. You might also consider some of the smaller growing flowering Magnolia species for spring interest, M. stellata and M.x loebneri are particularly useful as small scale trees/large shrubs here. All sorts of evergreen woodland species native to Oregon as well, with Vacciniums, Mahonias, Woodwardia, in combination with some of your native Vine Maples, Rhododendron occidentale.

I don't really work with the plants and climate you are in, so maybe posting this in the PNW garden forum would also generate comments that are more specific to your area. There are some great nurseries in Oregon as well, I'd recommend a visit to Cistus Nursery in Portland, and Roger Gossler's nursery(forget the name of it) to mention just a few to get some great ideas on Oregon specific planting combinations that are not so ordinary.

WHERE do you think I should plant the tree(s)? If I get one or two Ginkos, where should I put them? Or if I get a conifer or two, where? I cannot figure it out.

Woodyoak — I like your idea of primitive looking plants. I also love ferns and ginkos! I, too, appreciate the "living fossil" nature of the Dawn Redwood and it’s lovely green foliage. Where would you put the Ginko? Can you suggest other "primitive-looking" plants? When I think "primitive looking", I think "tropical." I looked up Wollemi Pine, and yes yes! I want one! You can order one from http://www.ancientpine.com/. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem hardy below 10 F, so I doubt it would be a good choice here.

Rhodium — I don’t have kids or dogs and don’t much care for lawn. I can take it all out, or leave just a little. You suggest that "a long view axis could be created to the right of treee to the far side of the yard" — I’m not quite sure what this means. Could you expand on that idea?

The Dawn Redwood is about 20-30 feet tall right now, so I think some other tall trees such as Ginko could catch up with it in time. I gather Ginko is supposed to grow about a foot a year; hopefully more here, where there’s so much rain. It would give me a green-blue-yellow palette in that area.

Drtygrl — I can’t imagine what prompted the joke! ;-) And I'm a she. You wanted a photo, and I don't own a camera, so I relied on google:

Bahia — I agree that the Dawn Redwood may be more of an obstruction than a benefit. It breaks my heart to think about taking it out, though. Five years ago I asked an arborist to move it; he said it was too big, had soft, fleshy roots, and would cost $2,500. So I left it.

I share your lack of appreciation for Oregon Myrtle (Umbellularia californica). It’s not very weedy here, but previous owners paved the area underneath with cement blocks. The city here does not allow tall plantings at an intersection corner, but has made an exception for this tree as long as I prune it high enough to walk underneath. If I take it out, I cannot continue the arborvitae hedge along the fenceline. I want to plant blueberries in front it of to provide more screening, and just in case the city changes its mind and makes me take it out. I’m worried about the greedy roots that you mention; will blueberries survive, or should I root prune?
Hopefully my revised drawings will answer your questions about space and function. The English Hawthorne will have to come out, but I’d like to get some more perimeter fruit/nut trees going first.

Cottage gardens are not my favorite, either; but they're quick, cheap, look nice and will turn an overgrown weedy front yard into an inviting scene. They also go well with Victorian houses; mine is a modest Victorian with two front porches and just a bit of gingerbread.

As for the side deck, 7 feet will be plenty. I don't entertain much, and my family and friends can darn well spend some time in the side yard, once I'm done with it.

Thank you for the great list of possible plants. I'm reading and making some tentative suggestions.

Toronado — I think darker small shrubs under the Dawn Redwood would provide a nice contrast with its light green foliage. How about bearberry, Viburnum davidii, ferns, knickinick, salal? What do you think?

My apologies for the looooooong message, but I don’t know how to post shorter messages in a row.

Rain2Fall

How about 2-6 more conifers in the area, starting where the Myrtle is and running past the garage to the edge of the backyard? And including the city parking strip outside my lot; I think I can get the city arborist's agreement to plant there.

Rain2Fall

For additional evergreen interest, I'd be inclined to add interesting broad-leafed evergreen shrubs that have large/unsual foliage, whether or not they are technically 'primitive'. I think they would fit in well in a primitive-themed garden. Since there are more that are hardy for you than me, you would have a better idea of what is available/suitable for your area. Conifers are more primitive trees than deciduous ones so some conifers are appropriate - but I'd be inclined to go for something more interesting than run-of-the-mill blue spruce! Your birch tree(s) are actually quite appropriate since trees with catkin flowers are the more primitive lines of deciduous trees.

There are several evergreen ferns (e.g. Dryopteris wallichiana or the smaller Cyrtomium falcatum) so it would be easy to add ferns that would give winter interest. Tuck the deciduous things like the Jack-in-the-pulpit into the fern areas so they could disappear quietly for the winter. I'm not sure of the 'age' of hellebores but they strike me as something that would fit comfortably into a primitive-themed garden and would be a nice addition to a ferny area.

Have fun playing with ideas!

Keep in mind this gets to be a BIG tree and if it's placement is awkward now, it will only get more so. The question I would ask yourself about it is "if not now, then when?"

As for the back yard, I would basically say that the plans you have for an orchard are incompatible with the big hawthorne. It's not helping the veggie bed either if I understand the plan correctly. Even valuable shade trees need replacement eventually. I personally like to make those decisions on a staggered schedule so not everything is exposed at once. If you wait until it all has to go, you go from one extreme to the other.

Bottom line is that you have some choices to make about how you use the property today, and either you make them, or you let the people who planted these trees in awkward places reach out from the past and make them for you. (and if that was you, you get to either correct your mistakes or keep making imperfect decisions to work around them).

KarinL

Usually I have to think in terms of protecting my sunny areas by keeping anything with significant height or leaf canopy to the N of them. So you'd actually place your veggie garden to the S and W of any large shade trees so the shade is thrown away from the garden--or have something for shade near the house to shade the house and open up something farther out in the yard. I may be playing it too strictly, because it depends on height and distance as to the area of shade created, and I can't tell all that.

Oregon myrtle often becomes a large gumdrop of a tree with a thick trunk on a suitable site. 30' is not fully grown for one of these.

Take some walks around the Hoyt Arboretum in Washington Park to get better acquainted with an assortment of trees and how they may look in your region. There is also the Timber Press book on Portland trees.

Here's some records from a little farther north, to give you a better idea of the true character of what you have.

Dawn Redwood

Stem circumference: 11'7"
Height: 67'
Average crown spread: 41'
Date Measured: 1993
Location: Lakewood, Lakewold Gardens

Oregon Myrtle

Stem circumference: 15'7"
Height: 53'
Average crown spread: 60'
Date measured: 1993
Location: Vancouver, 3409 Main St.

Source: Van Pelt, Champion Trees of Washington State (1996, University of Washington, Seattle)

The diameter of a tree trunk is often roughly 1/3 the circumference. So, the above trees could have been approximately 3' in the first case and 5'+ thick in the second when measured.