Rhododendrons and azaleas are shallow rooted plants and will be deprived of nutrients and water by much more agressive pachysandras.

I'd get rid of the Pachysandra while it's still new. I've spent the past 3 years trying to dig out a couple of patches of it which not only took over for all but trees and large shrubs in their beds, but even expanded into adjacent lawn.

One patch was a 12' diameter round bed, with a 20' pine in the middle, and all the rest was Pachysandra. The tree died, so I dug it and the Pachy out. I ended up digging down 3' and sifting all the soil to make sure I got all the Pachy. That was 3 years ago, and I'm still pulling sprouts and runners in the bed, and in adjacent lawn.

I hate the stuff!

I disagree with both of the previous posters :-) Japanese pachysandra is a very common evergreen groundcover in this area and is used frequently with rhodies and other shade loving evergreen shrubs. I've yet to see it grow that aggressively here and in the situation described so that it would choke out other, larger trees and shrubs. There are alternatives as well......lamium is an excellent GC under these conditions as is Saxifraga x urbium, hardy ginger and epimediums. Also hardy cyclamen will do well in this situation but will not be evergreen.

ggal48..read what I wrote again. I said it "took over for all but trees and large shrubs." "But" is a key modifier there. The Pine in my 12' bed was killed by freak heavy snow, not the P'sandra.

Allegheny spurge (Pachysandra procumbens) is an excellent native American alternative to the usual Japanese pachysandra. It's much less agressive and more ornamental (the leaves are larger and attractively mottled silver-gray).
My single plant has spread to cover about 4-5 square feet in three years.

Here is a link that might be useful: Pachysandra procumbens

The problem with Alleghany surge is that it's not agressive, and if you are looking for groundcover, you sort of need agressive. I have found Alleghany surge better for small clumps than for covering large areas.

I agree, I have pachysandra procumbens in the front in an area beneath a maple, surrounded by stone- very slow to establish & spread (it didn't help that my husband decided to 'weed' that area & ripped out most of the pachysandra-yes, I went crazy).

I've planted Japanese pacysandra-plain & variegated in an area in the back under a neighbor's large maple, it's a narrow swath, 2 plants deep, about 10' long-doesn't really seem like it's filling in or spreading. I have it on one side of a border/bed, 12' long,4-5' deep. It doesn't seem aggressive at all-right now, in that bed I have epimedium, hostas, heucheras, rohdeas, hellebores, a sambucus, -I hope the pachysandra will act as a border

Thanks, all of you, for your responses! I've been away for a while and haven't been able to get to a computer, so a belated thanks.

I'm thinking I will move the pachysandra. I'm not sure what I will use to knit that area together under the parking strip. I did want something evergreen, just to cut down on the bare earth factor. But maybe it would be fun to play with some low-growing perennials.

I do have some lamium in that area but not directly under these two huge fir trees. The trees seem to be shedding some kind of debris at every time of the year, sometimes in vast quantities. I have trouble keeping smaller plants from becoming buried. I have to blast them with a powerful leaf-blower to try to remove the stuff that's fallen on them. That's kind of why I've been planting azaleas, rhododendrons, the gardenias, etc.: It's harder for the trees to inundate these plants. (The two fir trees have to stay. I've tried to get a permit from the city to take them down. They occupy a rather narrow parking strip and crack up the sidewalk all of the time. Every few years I'm in for an expensive sidewalk repair. The city won't let me take them down though as long as they are healthy).

I think I will move the pachysandra to my back patio area where I have a foot-wide strip of earth between my fence and the patio. The fence is on a foot-high concrete base so I don't think the pachysandra will get high enough to interfere with air circulation to the wood fence.

This may sound goony, but will the pachysandra be appropriate for that kind of spot? It's contained by concrete on both sides (the patio and the base of the fence). I ask because the previous planting of ivy brought down a cinder block fence that was there and hence I had to have a new fence built. It took a lot of years, but the fence didn't stand a chance against the ivy that eventually had limbs as big as your fist in spots. I'm assuming the pachysandra won't have any fence-weakening capabilities. Does it?

That's a good place for pachysandra because it's contained - although it won't add much interest esp. near a patio. Pachysandra won't hurt the fence. It weaves around itself like spaghetti but it stays the same height. It's not like ivy which is a shrubby vine. Pachysandra doesn't cling or grow vertically.

I have a lot of Japanese pachysandra, ivy and vinca so I'm familiar with all 3. All groundcovers in my experience can co-exist with shrubs, but you have to be diligent about keeping some space between them. I dig out any groundcover that encroaches within a 3 foot diameter of the shrub's trunk and I've not had one die. I'm forced to do that if I want to plant in certain areas, but I wouldn't recommend it for your area. Why do that if you don't have to. Aggressive groundcovers are best if you plant it where you don't have to worry about it. I'm not fond of lamium in all places. I prefer evergreen groundcovers for areas like yours. Up here, lamium browns out in the heat of summer and dies back over winter so it has its limitations. However you being in the PNW, may not have the same problem. Vinca minor (periwinkle or creeping myrtle) is hardy, evergreen and blooms in the spring. That might be an option for you. Yes, it's still aggressive, but that's what you want. The roots are shallow and more manageable so it's not a bad option. Sweet woodruff is another thought.

Don't you love town government? Why can't you remove the trees? I'd start refusing to pay for the repairs. The city can't have it both ways. Who knows what these roots are doing to your home's foundation. It's worth a call to your local TV station to intervene on your behalf. They love David and Goliath stories.

"The city won't let me take them down though as long as they are healthy."

Psst. Make them sick. ;>)

nancyd, you wrote: "Don't you love town government? Why can't you remove the trees? I'd start refusing to pay for the repairs. The city can't have it both ways. Who knows what these roots are doing to your home's foundation. It's worth a call to your local TV station to intervene on your behalf. They love David and Goliath stories."

I live in Portland, Oregon and I don't think there is even one person here who would take my side in the fir tree dispute! The only trees that make the news are really old ones that are in ill health that people are trying to save, or the ones that they are lying down in front of to block the developer's bulldozer. We're mighty passionate about our trees here. ;-)

A visiting friend referred to Portland as a "leafy city." I do like it that way, but my fir trees should never have been planted in that narrow parking strip. And the city won't let me take them down because, in their words, "that would set a precedent for others with the same problem and there are trees all over the city planted in inappropriate spots." They also said, kind of cantankerously, "Have you ever seen a city without trees, what that looks like?"

We have a group called "Friends of Trees": http://www.friendsoftrees.org/home/index.php
For a smallish fee (say $50.00) volunteers will plant a tree in your yard.

About the possible damage to the foundation of my house: Maybe I should check to see if those darned roots are reaching as far as my foundation, find some kind of expert to let me know, and, if so, demand the city let me take them down. Of course, removing them would be wildly expensive too.

Sorry to disgress so since this is, after all, the perennials forum.

I understand the love for trees. Cities without trees are ugly, no argument there. But large trees can be a menace if not planted in the right place and the city shouldn't be trying to shame you about wanting them removed. Why can't you replant with something less invasive? They're being pretty authoritarian if you ask me. And donn is right - there are ways to kill a tree if you really wanted to. But it sounds like maybe you don't. Good luck either way!