the larger the tree.. the higher the odds for failure ....

a .75 to 1 inch tree.. will outgrow your larger ones.. inside 5 years.. due to faster establishment.. less stress.. etc .... and PROBABLY COST 33% of the quoted price ...

also .. short lived trees... well.. trees can live centuries.. a short lived one .. half a century.. 25 years ... i would not discount such based on that ... but if the flowers dont impress you.. so be it ...

now ... do the old ones all have to come out at once???? .. as i am presuming.. you want large trees for immediate gratification ...

what if you removed one large one.. every other year.. well smaller trees got established .... perhaps take out the middle one ..... replant that one... so that in 3 years.. you will have some sight block.. and then remove the other two .... stagger the process as one might say ...

finally.. i would go with 3 different types .... so when the next plague comes along.. it wont wipe them all out at once ... i would go for the early blooming redbud.. then one that blooms a month later [magnolia???] .. and the third a month after that ...

dont trap yourself in a box... before looking at all the options .....

ken

All I know about the size is that that is what I was being offered. I would definitely consider smaller trees if that would save a significant amount of money. It's going to look odd regardless.

Not only should all the trees come out at once, they should have come out several years ago. I've been delaying the inevitable.

I had thought about using 3 different trees, or atleast 2 different trees, but I'm not sure that would look good, given the design of the planting and my need for symmetry. It is something to think further about though.

Thanks for your help,
Totally Confused

Good advice from Ken but I understand your ideas of symmetry. I would atleast consider the center one to be one thing and the two on either side another type.

Another suggestion for trees would be the Crabapple. Resistent varieties like Purple Prince or Prairiefire.

A suggestion: Center tree maybe the Paperbark Maple and two flowering trees that match on either side. None of these are readily available and you will have to search your local nurseries. I personally called around until I found what I wanted. None of these are large trees.
Cher

Cher, thanks for the additional suggestions. I will research them. Is there any problem with underplanting the paper bark maple? The trees are "placeholders" in what is primarily a perennial bed. We had a crabapple before and it was a mess, but it was planted twenty years ago, so probably not a resistant variety.

Totally Confused

confused,
I got to wonder why the dogwoods "have to be removed and replaced". Later you mention planting extensively in the beds. Which lead me to wonder if you are not so disturbing the soil that nothing you plant there tree wise,will do well? You might also consider one of the smaller selections of Crape Myrtle. Not my cup of tea, but many people love them.

Arktrees

Arktrees, the dogwoods had been doing fine until 3 years ago when they sustained severe heat damage from a total loss house fire that began on the back deck. They had probably been in the ground for about 15 or 16 years at that time. They really should have been removed the spring following the fire, once the full extent of the damage could be determined, but not wanting to deal with it, I put it off. Another tree in the yard, which was also damaged in the fire, was further damaged during hurricane Irene a month or so ago and needs to be removed. I figured I'd just have everything done at once. However, I do a fair amount of digging back there, so that is a consideration in selecting a tree.

As for the crape myrtle, we have one in the front yard, but I don't think I'm going to get DH on board with any more of them. Not his cup of tea either.

Totally Confused

confused,
I meant no offense. Lots of people come on this forum with unrealistic expectations, and/or having done something to seriously harm their trees, then have no clue they cause the problem. I was simply trying to make sure all possibilities were addressed in case you needed to be educated further.

With that said, I've seen several Fringe Trees and I like them very much. They are very different from what you commonly see, and they do not get large. Also we have Paperbark Maple planted in full sun, that seem very happy and is growing quickly, however I can not advise you on under planting. But I would not expect it to be any more sensitive than Japanese Maple or Azeleas (generally surface rooted, and hence in harms way of disturbance). Much would depend upon the soil. Conducive for deeper roots, and they likely would be fine. Also if they are planted under from the beginning, then they stand a good chance of adapting to it. However, I would say if you under planted under the dogwoods for many years before the fire, I would expect that you other mentioned options would be fine, as the dogwoods are probable more sensitive to the disturbance IMHO.

Arktrees

as a person who has 1500 hosta.. growing under trees ...

i would say that ANY acer .. any maple.. will destroy your garden bed inside of a decade ... [also willow, mulberry, box elder and some others that are escaping me]

the tree peeps think that is an anathema ... but their heads are up their canopies.. lol ...

people who garden are ALWAYS complaining about maples ...

symmetry ... whatever floats you boats ... i just like having trees that produce a show in and of themselves.. over a period of time.. rather than one type that shoots its wad in 2 weeks ... again.. just offering you to think outside any predisposition to setting up a box.. and not thinking outside of it ....

now i dont do dogwood ... but if cut at 3 inches ... will they regenerate???? with some selective pruning ???? or are they stone dead????

ken

Arktrees, I wasn't offended at all. I was just trying to explain the situation. I realize my initial posts were a bit cryptic about the actual problem with the trees. The reality is that they probably could stay for several more years, but eventually they are going to have to be removed and I'm going to have to replace them with something so...

Ken, the trees are not "stone dead" but the front half of them has had to be cut back severely to remove the dead branches, and each spring it seems I have to cut them back further. There is also damage to the trunks where the bark split open from the heat. I don't think pruning is going to make these trees either healthy or attractive again.

I have read other posts where you have described the difficulties of gardening under maples. That is why I questioned whether the paperbark was a good choice in this application. If not for yours, and similar posts, it never would have occured to me that there might be a problem.

Totally Confused

You can also check out a Little leaf Linden. I love mine. Who ever lived here prior to me was crazy enough to build up two levels of stone wall to make a circle around the tree, very small in size. I can only guess that they originally might have had things planted within the circle.
Fortunately I joined GW and read up quite a bit, grumped about their mistake and promptly went outside and removed said pavers/retaining wall things and all soil down to the proper level. Now I just await leaf drop so I can trim up the tree a bit more so it's more push mower friendly. I don't like banging my head on such low branches! :)

Good Luck in your search for replacement trees!

~Tina