How tall growing?

I would be getting most likely the 15 gallon trees (if the price is right). It would be nice if the trees were at least 6ft. and could grow 1-2 ft a year.

But I'm open to different ideas. I don't know a lot about plants.

Okay, so what plants do you recommend?

Indicate specific desired features like mature height in order to enable posters here to make suggestions of use to you.

Another thing you can do to help things fall into place is to tour local retailers and public gardens, see what kinds of plants are present in your particular area that you like the look of.

Thanks, yes, I've been to the local stores and they recommended the australian bottle tree which i have another post about.

heres the other post.. just fyi ...

https://www.houzz.com/discussions/australian-bottle-tree-info-help-are-there-seed-pods-dsvw-vd~5215540?n=18

one trick i have for looking into the future.. is at this link ... imo ... these trees have a lot of potential.. for the site you show us .... note i converted to the latin name ..

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Brachychiton+populneus&t=ffcm&iax=images&ia=images

i would not plant a monoculture.. just to repeat myself ...

i would also not plant all the same size ... i would enjoy undulating size ...

in the last pic.. i only see one issue of privacy ... is that the only window where you need immediate help .. of are the pix deceptive??? ...perhaps the tree above.. sited in regard to this window.. would do the trick there... but why would you need all the same all the way across ...

you keep mentioning fast growing ... the problem with those words.. is that everything 'fast growing' .. will keep growing.. and with trees.. forever ... they really dont stop at some magical height ... you have to have some patience with trees ... even if you buy large... they will stall for a few years.. while they get over the insult/stress of planting ...

this MI boy has no clue about vegas horticulture.. so i leave you by wishing you luck

ken

I'm a StLouis boy who hasn't been to Vegas in a decade but I do remember enough that I know there is a very nice Red Rock park and Mt Charleston nearby!

I recommend going to the desert botanical garden in Phoenix. A decade back I went and this light bulb went off that it was not necessary to try to recreate a New England yard to have some green in Vegas yards.

You all have some serious water problems out there and the potential for life to get very expensive. Trees and even bushes live decades, plan accordingly.

Zone 9 & dry?

I would [recommend[(https://www.houzz.com/discussions/favorite-underused-trees-dsvw-vd~1735953) these trees:

Texas Persimmon (Diospyros texana)

Pineapple Guava (Feijoa sellowiana)

Mission Olive Tree (Olea europaea)

Goldenball Leadtree (Leucaena retusa)

Kieffer Pear Tree (Pyrus communis x P. pyrifolia)

Western Soapberry (Sapindus drummondii)

Common Fig Tree (Ficus carica)

Desert Willow (Chilopsis linearis) 'Lucretia Hamilton'

Texas Mountain Laurel (Dermatophyllum secundiflorum)

Red Mulberry (Morus rubra)

Pomegranate Tree (Punica granatum)

Eve's Necklace (Styphnolobium affine)

Moringa Oleifera (PKM1) Tree (Horseradish Tree)

Loquat (Eriobotrya japonica)

Medjool Date Palm (Phoenix dactylifera)

Thornless Jujube (Ziziphus jujuba var. inermis)

And these bushes:

Texas sage (Leucophyllum frutescens)

Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis)

Thornless Blackberry (Rubus ulmifolius)

And these flowers:

Iris (& other bulb/rhizome/tuber flowers)

Passionflower (Passiflora incarnata, etc)

And for "living mulch" ground cover:

Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas)

O.P. stated in the beginning - as people often do - that they don't want anything poisonous or messy. Which eliminates many items on preceding list, which is full of fruiting plants. And has at least one kind that is notoriously poisonous as well:

Both seeds and flowers are quite poisonous and contain narcotic properties

https://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu/ornamentals/nativeshrubs/sophorasecund.htm

I'd put in columnar cacti, aloes, agave -- but I know they're not particularly kid-friendly. Maybe a few bougainvillea on trellises for more height where needed. Anyway, these are all fairly low-maintenance and xeric.

Tecoma stans

Eucalyptus gilli

Eucalyptus kruseana

Acacia stenophylla

Acacia jennerae

These are all heat resistant (which you will need) and mostly very low water (which will reduce your water bill).

"O.P. stated in the beginning - as people often do - that they don't want anything poisonous or messy. Which eliminates many items on preceding list, which is full of fruiting plants."

Yes, I was aware of that. But that mainstream, fast food, McLandscape mentality of wanting "fast-growing and not messy" plants is also what's helping to drive our current 6th mass extinction of wildlife on this planet - cutting their populations down in HALF over just the last 40 YEARS!!! The situation is EXTREMELY dire now - as we are literally creating a sterile, inert dystopia! And there's no way you can overstate that fact - or ever UNDO it once it's done!

"Bird populations across the French countryside have fallen by a third over the last decade and a half, researchers have said.

Dozens of species have seen their numbers decline, in some cases by two-thirds, the scientists said in a pair of studies

The primary culprit, researchers speculate, is the intensive use of pesticides on vast tracts of monoculture crops, especially wheat and corn.

The problem is not that birds are being poisoned, but that the insects on which they depend for food have disappeared. “There are hardly any insects left, that’s the number one problem,”

Recent research, he noted, has uncovered similar trends across Europe, estimating that flying insects have declined by 80%, and bird populations has dropped by more than 400m in 30 years.

Shrinking woodlands, the absence of the once common practice of letting fields lie fallow and especially rapidly expanding expanses of mono-crops have each played a role."

So, given that we have already logged all the old growth native forests and replaced them with suburban lawns...we really need to start stewarding our lawns LIKE old growth native forests now. Because there are basically no old growth forests LEFT. So, we need to think more "old growth" instead of "fast-growing," "productive" instead of "not messy," and to promote more natives and no invasives...

I mean, who cares if you're not there in a few years anymore? Leave a sustainable legacy!!!

"The population of the U.S., now over 300 million people, has doubled since most of us were kids and continues to grow by 8640 people per day. All of those additional souls, coupled with cheap gas, our love affair with the car, and our quest to own ever larger homes have fueled unprecedented development that continues to sprawl over 2 million additional acres per year (the size of Yellowstone National Park). The Chesapeake Bay watershed has lost 100 acres of forest each day since 1985. We have connected all of our developments with 4 million miles of roads, the paved surface is nearly five times the size of New Jersey. Somewhere along the way we decided to convert most of our living and working spaces into huge expanses of lawn. So far we have planted over 62,500 sq miles, some 40 million acres, in lawn. Each weekend we mow an area 8 times the size of New Jersey to within 1 inch and then congratulate ourselves on a job well done. And it’s not like those little woodlots and “open spaces” we have not paved over or manicured are pristine. Nearly all are second-growth forests that have been thoroughly invaded by alien plants like autumn olive, multiflora rose, Oriental bittersweet, and Japanese honeysuckle. Over 3400 species of alien plants have invaded 100 million acres of the U.S, and that area is expected to double in the next 5 years.

To nature lovers these are horrifying statistics. I stress them so that we can clearly understand the challenge before us. We have turned 54% of the lower 48 states into cities and suburbs, and 41% more into various forms of agriculture. That’s right: we humans have taken 95% of nature and made in unnatural. But does this matter? Are there consequences to turning so much land into the park-like settings humans enjoy? Absolutely, both for biodiversity and for us. Our fellow creatures need food and shelter to survive and reproduce and in too many places we have eliminated both. At least 40% of Delaware’s plant species are rare or extinct, and 41% of its forest birds no longer nest in the state. Over 800 plant and animal species are rare, threatened, or endangered in Pennsylvania and 150 have already disappeared entirely. Many of those that haven’t suffered local extinction are now too rare to perform their role in their ecosystem. These can be considered functionally extinct. The song birds that brighten spring mornings have been in decline since the 1960s, having lost 40% of their numbers so far. Birds that breed in meadows are in even more trouble. Once common species such as the northern bobwhite, eastern meadowlark, field sparrow, and grasshopper sparrow have declined 82%, 72%, 68%, and 65%, respectively, in total numbers, and are completely absent from many areas that used to support healthy populations."

Anyhow, yes, the Texas Mountain Laurel is poisonous. However, its seeds are only toxic if cracked open - which is really difficult because of how hard their shells are. Hence:

"The beans cause hallucinations at low levels. The beans are also very poisonous if the alkaloids within are released. The same seed coating that protect the seed from drought, however, will allow it to be swallowed and pass through our bodies without harm, in most cases."

So, it's not as risky as it sounds - but of course could simply be omitted just to be safe. As could the Eve's Necklace, which is also reputed to have poisonous seeds if ingested.

But all the other plants I recommended ARE non-toxic, mostly natives (with a few foreign, but at least not invasive) with high ornamental and/or edible/utilitarian value (i.e. "MESSY"). As this PRODUCTIVITY helps us to make the most of our diminishing resources, for both us and all of our wildlife companions.

OK, PSA over. Just addressing a larger issue at hand here, that I think needs to at least be considered every time a homeowner reaches this point of deciding how to landscape their yard? Which I thank Kimberly for even asking! As it may seem inconsequential...but when multiplied by BILLIONS of other people too - is actually of immense, PLANETARY consequence!!!

The practical reality of fruit trees in built up areas on any and all sites where there are not enthusiasts in attendance that keep completely on top of the harvesting of every crop is they make stinking messes that may foster swarms of nuisance insects. And in coastal areas are a great resource for wharf rats.

But providing a basis for the making of a significant dent in the need to feed the World, not so much.

The City of Seattle used to prohibit the planting of orchard fruits on city streets and probably still does. In addition to producing a sometimes slick layer of fallen fruits on paved surfaces laden fruit trees can have problems with breakage, something else not desirable where numbers of people are walking and driving.

^ The practical reality is that local, fresh, organic produce is in high demand from both humans and wildlife now - and won't be left to rot anywhere. And again, insects are not a "nuisance" to birds and other wildlife right above them on the food chain - but FOOD necessary to their very survival!!!

"insects are delivering protein from plants to an awful lot of creatures...that themselves are part of the food web. You take away insects and everything collapses. And unfortunately the way, the way we have gardened, which has been just for, you know, aesthetics, plants have become decorations instead of functioning units of the landscape, has encouraged that. We've picked plants that are pest free meaning that nothing can eat them..."

And you do realize what sits at the top of this planet's food chain, btw?

Which is ironically why the City of Seattle has since seen the light, corrected course, and has helped to grow the nation's largest food forest in the middle of their city, now!

"The Beacon Food Forest (BFF) started in 2009 as a result of a permaculture design course final project."

"Over the past few days, permaculture practitioners and urban food policy followers not just in the Emerald City but around the globe have been positively abuzz with news that a hilly and undeveloped 7-acre parcel of land owned by Seattle Public Utilities will be transformed into a lush, forager-friendly wonderland called the Beacon Food Forest.

The Beacon Food Forest will be located less than 3 miles southeast of Seattle’s downtown core in the ethnically and economically diverse Beacon Hill neighborhood (former home of Amazon.com, by the way) adjacent to a large park.

A Food Forest is a gardening technique or land management system that mimics a woodland ecosystem but substitutes in edible trees, shrubs, perennials and annuals. Fruit and nut trees are the upper level, while below are berry shrubs, edible perennials and annuals. Companions or beneficial plants are included to attract insects for natural pest management while some plants are soil amenders providing nitrogen and mulch. Together they create relationships to form a forest garden ecosystem able to produce high yields of food with less maintenance."

"In 2011, a seven-acre swath of land was set aside in Seattle, Washington's Beacon Hill neighborhood with a singular purpose -- to grow food. What started as a final design project for a permaculture course in 2009 has now, five years later, become the Beacon Food Forest (BFF), though still under development."

I know you are in a dry area but presumably you do get rain sometimes. I'd be concerned that the way the soil is heaped up behind the wall it would wash off pretty quick in a downpour. I notice Dave's picture has a screen covering. That might be a thought for you.