Oh I forgot to mention. Dawn Redwood also crossed my mind for this spot as the mature width is always listed at 20ft. Though I've read that once it starts to get "older" it will start to widen some. So it's a super cool tree but I'm not sure whether it would make sense here either.

Long term, I am not sure it matters because the tree will be boxed in by four other large trees. 30-35' spacing between these behemoths is not much, assuming you envision these as specimens rather than a big grove. I'd focus on something you would enjoy for the first 15 years or so. As the trees mature, this planting will become less and less visible.

Are you familiar with catalpa worms? Perhaps you don't get them in Indiana. In my area, they appear mid-summer in numbers of biblical proportions. I admire catalpas but they need to be set off from the house because those caterpillars come down off the tree and burrow into the lawn and its truly nasty.

Zelkova

Copper Beech (although, they are slow, but worth it)

American Hornbeam (carpinus carolinana)

Acer Platanoides 'Royal Red'

Maybe even an ornamental cherry if you are willing for it to be temporary.

Copper beech and purple Norway maple make large dark features in the landscape, that can be odd outside of urban settings. And Norway maple is quite a weed in the northern U.S.

Also if I was going to plant a purple beech I would plant a good definite purple one like 'Riversii' and not a copper one.

Well so far I've had some thoughts similar to a number of the comments here. I was thinking maybe some sort of smaller under-story tree might make more sense here. Or possibly the faster growing trees with the plan to take them down after 15 years or so once the oak and the sugar maple start to fill into this spot.

In regards to why I was thinking fast grower here. This is the place I'm targeting for shade in the short term. The existing Silver Maple is the best shade tree on the property...and it's not great, especially in the morning. I was thinking a fast grower here would help with the morning shade in the short term with the oak rising up to take that over in the long term. Does that make sense, or should I be thinking more like by the time this fast grower is big enough to help the existing Silver Maple will also be big enough not to need the help?

Regarding catalpa worms there aren't any around these parts. Those who have lived here a long time say that 40 or so years ago they used to defoliate the Catalpa trees. But it doesn't happen anymore.

Logan, I thought you were against using cherry as a shade tree due to disease and pest problems?

Regarding Royal Red Maple, isn't that a norway/sugar maple hybrid? Is that still a weed tree?

I normally wouldn't suggest ornamental fruit, but if you want fast and temporary it might not be so bad. Of course, it will most likely die a slow death and need to be put out of it's misery in 15-20 years. 'Royal Red' is a cultivar of norway maple, and you probably will see a minimal amount of volunteers (don't worry about it, it's a pretty tree).

By the way here is the link to the previous discussion about this area of the landscape: http://forums2.gardenweb.com/discussions/4100427/the-grand-tree-landscaping-plan-phase-1.

Lot's of good talk there about the plan. You might notice that a few items have shifted around 5ft here or there but still the same basic plan except that it just showed fast/slow growth. Now I'm trying to get it filled in with exact species.

As far as the cherry goes I really think this spot is too wet.
Isn't cherry one of the more sensitive to wet soil types? I was walking
out there today and there was standing water all around, granted it's
been raining all day. But that's pretty common out there when there's any decent rain. It'll probably be wet till the weekend.

So here's one more thought that just came to my mind. I have a salix discolor that I started from a cutting this summer. I've been trying to figure out where I'm going to put it this spring. Maybe this would be a good spot for it? Maybe I can train up into a small tree rather than letting it branch out in the shrub form. It shouldn't get nearly as big as some of the other trees I've looked at and I would think it won't mind the wet soil. From what I'm finding it's considered shade tolerant too.

I like the under story tree idea; that could be a nice spot for a willow. A paw paw could be another choice.

Long as water is no concern, Metasequoia or its thinner cultivar Metasequoia Ogon. Fast as anything and both are narrow in relation to their height.

All the late 1940's main species plantings I have seen still retain their pyramidal shape. I have heard and seen at least one picture of an OLD one flatening out at the top. That is a concern for the year 2200 I feel.

I wouldn't put a cherry there or any other fruit tree. They only grow in well-drained soil IME, and the 3 understory trees I suggested plus beech IME prefer well-drained soil also. Personally I don't think the difference in speed of growth of trees suggested will make enough difference as far as shade for anything except the lawn immediately around it vs what you already have planted. I wouldn't ever plant a Norway maple such as Acer platanoides 'Royal Red' regardless; Logan tends at times to suggest inappropriate invasives, perhaps just trollishly, perhaps just willful ignorance. It is invasive and will seed around willy-nilly in gardens and yard as well as anywhere the seeds blow or are washed into. To my eye Norway maple an ungainly lump of a tree; I don't know of many trees as homely considering its undistinguished bark and awkward winter branch form. Of all the maples it has the least grace of form IMO.

Metasequoia or the Salix would be your best bet, I think since both will tolerate the dampness as well as drier soil. I've seen Metasequoia growing in a fair amount of shade so it should persist even when your other trees have gotten larger, and the Salix will die off when it gets too shady for it IME. I don't think you'll see shade for your house and patio any time soon from a tree 50+ feet away, however, if that is your shade goal. I think the close-by white pine is your best chance for shade for that area, with perhaps a small flowering tree planted just a few feet from the patio adding shade.

Norway maple doesn't have any more voluteers than silver maple, red maple, or sugar maple. I just choose not to care about it being "invasive". I am not trying to troll or be "ignorant". I simply don't care how invasive a plant is. It is the OP's decision, but mine is already made.

OK, well before this topic degrades to another debate about invasive species...I'm thinking it seems like we're honing in on Metasequoia and Pussy Willow. Interesting that such drastically different species could be options in the same spot. Dawn Redwood would be a bit of a squeeze when the Oak and Maple are at full size but being a longer lived tree it could be helpful to have it there when the Silver Maple goes into decline. On the other hand I already have the Salix and need a place to put it.

Thanks all for your input. Still a bit to think about but this has been very helpful. Any further thoughts. Could Dawn Redwood really work in such a tight spot?

Metasequoia are fast growing and beautiful, but a bit big. Same for Tulip Tree. Pussy Willow would fit but doesn't provide much shade.

Copper Beech are beautiful and shade tolerant but grow very slow.

American Persimmon is shade tolerant and has a somewhat vertical habit (good qualities if you want to squeeze in another tree). Moderate grower. I think it would be a good choice.

One other thought that I had that I didn't mention. I could always go with the free Silver Maple with the intent to take it down after 15 years when the other large trees start to box it in. hamburglar1 mentioned that any tree in this spot is sort of temporary. I sure wouldn't be very heart broken about cutting down a Silver Maple. Fast up, fast down. Any thoughts on that?

No silver maple. I have already explained this many times.

It is not that the tree will be temporary. Just that it won't be fully viewable in the specimen-sense, once the surrounding trees grow in. This plant will more or less be in the center of a grove or grouping, in terms of visibility. Long story short, you don't need to overthink this particular planting, like you may for a specimen tree planted in an open area.

If you are going to put in a maple in that spot, I'd go for a red maple for the spring bloom and fall color and less likelihood of dropping large limbs to damage the other trees. Referred to as swamp maple here, so quite damp tolerant, but I have ones that grow on well-drained soil as well. You won't need to remove it - it will do fine with the other trees.

Thanks hamburglar1. I guess I wasn't as clear as I should have been in what I was concerned about. I just want to be sure that the trees won't be so close together that their going to choke each other out and seriously shorten their lives. Being able to see each specimen would be nice but I don't mind if they grow up into a grove. The primary goal here is to create one part of the yard with nice shade. The end target for the entire landscaping is to create a nice shaded spot to the East, a good wind break in the West, good shade over the drive, and open sunny place in the south (since the septic tank and field are there), and a place in the North where some fruit trees could maybe go.

Thanks everyone for all your input!

Well after thinking on this for a number of days I'm thinking I really like the idea of Red Maple. But then after giving it even more thought I'm thinking why not put the nicer Red Maple up in the spot near the house and the Catalpa over in the spot that's going to be a little tight. Although the Catalpa just recently went in the ground but I suppose it could still be moved since it hasn't been there long and it was in a pretty much perfect rootball; the ground around it stuck together perfectly when I dug it out.