i am in the middle of finishig my garden to the front and want to put in
shrub or small tree as the centre piece. am looking for something with a max
height of @5ft and 3/4ft spread. would prefer something bright and cheerful.
any suggestions.

also thought of dwarf lilac which i believe flowers twice a year.

thanks in advance.

mac

"Mac" wrote in message ...
i am in the middle of finishig my garden to the front and want to put in
shrub or small tree as the centre piece. am looking for something with a max
height of @5ft and 3/4ft spread. would prefer something bright and cheerful.
any suggestions.

also thought of dwarf lilac which i believe flowers twice a year.

thanks in advance.

mac

One of my favourites for a special small tree (a bit bigger than you specify but not much) is Prunus incisa
'Pendula', a delightful, dainty weeping Cherry - not easy to find but worth the effort.

Rod

in article , Mac at wrote on
9/9/03 3:40 pm:

i am in the middle of finishig my garden to the front and want to put in
shrub or small tree as the centre piece. am looking for something with a max
height of @5ft and 3/4ft spread. would prefer something bright and cheerful.
any suggestions.

also thought of dwarf lilac which i believe flowers twice a year.

thanks in advance.

mac


You can train a Cotoneaster as a standard with a weeping habit. It's very
attractive. You can do the same with a Wisteria - unusual and eye catching,
too.
--

Sacha
(remove the 'x' to email me)

in article , Mac at wrote on
9/9/03 3:40 pm:

i am in the middle of finishig my garden to the front and want to put in
shrub or small tree as the centre piece. am looking for something with a max
height of @5ft and 3/4ft spread. would prefer something bright and cheerful.
any suggestions.

also thought of dwarf lilac which i believe flowers twice a year.

thanks in advance.

mac


You can train a Cotoneaster as a standard with a weeping habit. It's very
attractive. You can do the same with a Wisteria - unusual and eye catching,
too.
--

Sacha
(remove the 'x' to email me)

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Mac at wrote on
9/9/03 3:40 pm:

i am in the middle of finishig my garden to the front and want to put in
shrub or small tree as the centre piece. am looking for something with a
max
height of @5ft and 3/4ft spread. would prefer something bright and
cheerful.
any suggestions.

also thought of dwarf lilac which i believe flowers twice a year.

thanks in advance.

mac


You can train a Cotoneaster as a standard with a weeping habit. It's very
attractive. You can do the same with a Wisteria - unusual and eye
catching,
too.

Some questions about a standard Wisteria:
Must I buy a pretrained standard, or can I just buy a small Wisteria and
train it with a single stem?
Are such specimens grafted high up on a standard stem?
If an idiot like me were to have a shot at training one, do I do it by just
excising any branching growth below the desired height?
What would be a sensible minimum height for the stem? I suppose it should
be just a little more than the anticipated annual growth.

Franz

in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 10/9/03 2:30 pm:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Mac at wrote on
9/9/03 3:40 pm:

i am in the middle of finishig my garden to the front and want to put in
shrub or small tree as the centre piece. am looking for something with a
max
height of @5ft and 3/4ft spread. would prefer something bright and
cheerful.
any suggestions.

also thought of dwarf lilac which i believe flowers twice a year.

thanks in advance.

mac


You can train a Cotoneaster as a standard with a weeping habit. It's very
attractive. You can do the same with a Wisteria - unusual and eye
catching,
too.

Some questions about a standard Wisteria:
Must I buy a pretrained standard, or can I just buy a small Wisteria and
train it with a single stem?
Are such specimens grafted high up on a standard stem?
If an idiot like me were to have a shot at training one, do I do it by just
excising any branching growth below the desired height?
What would be a sensible minimum height for the stem? I suppose it should
be just a little more than the anticipated annual growth.

Franz


Franz with the ones I've seen in others' gardens and the one we're growing
here on our lawn, all that's been done is to take off unwanted growth up the
stem. IIRC, the mature ones I saw were about 5' or 6' tall and were just
being allowed to sprawl across the grass as they wished. Whether they were
self-limiting or not, I don't know but I'd guess they were. I would imagine
the weight of a Wisteria that is *not* trained along wires up a wall would
cause it to bend over and contain its own height quite naturally.
You can either train them up a single stake or make a sort of 3 or 5 pronged
'umbrella' at the top and train the strongest branches along those,
allowing laterals to develop naturally, if you wish. It seems to me that
the less interference, the more attractive the final appearance.
Just buy a normal Wisteria and bung it in. ;-) In any case, grafted
Wisteria flower younger than un-grafted ones.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
(remove the 'x' to email me)

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 10/9/03 2:30 pm:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Mac at wrote
on
9/9/03 3:40 pm:

i am in the middle of finishig my garden to the front and want to put
in
shrub or small tree as the centre piece. am looking for something with
a
max
height of @5ft and 3/4ft spread. would prefer something bright and
cheerful.
any suggestions.

also thought of dwarf lilac which i believe flowers twice a year.

thanks in advance.

mac


You can train a Cotoneaster as a standard with a weeping habit. It's
very
attractive. You can do the same with a Wisteria - unusual and eye
catching,
too.

Some questions about a standard Wisteria:
Must I buy a pretrained standard, or can I just buy a small Wisteria and
train it with a single stem?
Are such specimens grafted high up on a standard stem?
If an idiot like me were to have a shot at training one, do I do it by
just
excising any branching growth below the desired height?
What would be a sensible minimum height for the stem? I suppose it
should
be just a little more than the anticipated annual growth.

Franz


Franz with the ones I've seen in others' gardens and the one we're growing
here on our lawn, all that's been done is to take off unwanted growth up
the
stem. IIRC, the mature ones I saw were about 5' or 6' tall and were just
being allowed to sprawl across the grass as they wished. Whether they
were
self-limiting or not, I don't know but I'd guess they were. I would
imagine
the weight of a Wisteria that is *not* trained along wires up a wall would
cause it to bend over and contain its own height quite naturally.
You can either train them up a single stake or make a sort of 3 or 5
pronged
'umbrella' at the top and train the strongest branches along those,
allowing laterals to develop naturally, if you wish. It seems to me that
the less interference, the more attractive the final appearance.
Just buy a normal Wisteria and bung it in. ;-) In any case, grafted
Wisteria flower younger than un-grafted ones.

I will have a shot during this planting season.
I intend to stake it firmly until the stem is capable of standing up on its
own. My guess is that four or five years should be enough.

Franz

in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 10/9/03 8:17 pm:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
snipIt seems to me that
the less interference, the more attractive the final appearance.
Just buy a normal Wisteria and bung it in. ;-) In any case, grafted
Wisteria flower younger than un-grafted ones.

I will have a shot during this planting season.
I intend to stake it firmly until the stem is capable of standing up on its
own. My guess is that four or five years should be enough.

I think it will become academic, in fact. The stake will be almost
invisible after a time and there will be no need to remove it. In fact, my
instinct would be not to do so. This is not a plant designed to support its
own weight and spread on a single stem. The mature ones I've seen must have
been easily 5 or 6 feet around, probably more.

--

Sacha
(remove the 'x' to email me)

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 10/9/03 8:17 pm:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
snipIt seems to me that
the less interference, the more attractive the final appearance.
Just buy a normal Wisteria and bung it in. ;-) In any case, grafted
Wisteria flower younger than un-grafted ones.

I will have a shot during this planting season.
I intend to stake it firmly until the stem is capable of standing up on
its
own. My guess is that four or five years should be enough.

I think it will become academic, in fact. The stake will be almost
invisible after a time and there will be no need to remove it. In fact,
my
instinct would be not to do so. This is not a plant designed to support
its
own weight and spread on a single stem. The mature ones I've seen must
have
been easily 5 or 6 feet around, probably more.

Sacha, I had an ancient Wisteria against the wall of a previous house. Its
main stem was thicker than my arm. I am sure it would have been able to
support the plant. But perhaps it takes too long for the stem to reach that
size, so yes, the stake might as well stay in place. The trouble with any
staking of any kind in my present garden is that it it twice as stony as you
might think it is.
Franz

in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 11/9/03 8:42 am:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 10/9/03 8:17 pm:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
snipIt seems to me that
the less interference, the more attractive the final appearance.
Just buy a normal Wisteria and bung it in. ;-) In any case, grafted
Wisteria flower younger than un-grafted ones.

I will have a shot during this planting season.
I intend to stake it firmly until the stem is capable of standing up on
its
own. My guess is that four or five years should be enough.

I think it will become academic, in fact. The stake will be almost
invisible after a time and there will be no need to remove it. In fact,
my
instinct would be not to do so. This is not a plant designed to support
its
own weight and spread on a single stem. The mature ones I've seen must
have
been easily 5 or 6 feet around, probably more.

Sacha, I had an ancient Wisteria against the wall of a previous house. Its
main stem was thicker than my arm. I am sure it would have been able to
support the plant. But perhaps it takes too long for the stem to reach that
size, so yes, the stake might as well stay in place. The trouble with any
staking of any kind in my present garden is that it it twice as stony as you
might think it is.

I know that our climbing wisteria has a very thick stem, too. But the
reason I think it better to leave the stake in place, is that climbing
Wisterias do have the support of wall and wires. Free-standing ones must
take all their weight on that one trunk and loll around on the ground, doing
something they weren't originally designed for. While they're growing and
the trunk is thickening, I would think there's quite a strain on that trunk.
You may well be right that the plant would manage without being staked, but
if I'd got one to full maturity over a period of years, I would prefer not
to risk it.
--

Sacha
(remove the 'x' to email me)

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 11/9/03 8:42 am:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
in article , Franz Heymann at
wrote on 10/9/03 8:17 pm:


"Sacha" wrote in message
...
snipIt seems to me that
the less interference, the more attractive the final appearance.
Just buy a normal Wisteria and bung it in. ;-) In any case, grafted
Wisteria flower younger than un-grafted ones.

I will have a shot during this planting season.
I intend to stake it firmly until the stem is capable of standing up
on
its
own. My guess is that four or five years should be enough.

I think it will become academic, in fact. The stake will be almost
invisible after a time and there will be no need to remove it. In
fact,
my
instinct would be not to do so. This is not a plant designed to
support
its
own weight and spread on a single stem. The mature ones I've seen must
have
been easily 5 or 6 feet around, probably more.

Sacha, I had an ancient Wisteria against the wall of a previous house.
Its
main stem was thicker than my arm. I am sure it would have been able to
support the plant. But perhaps it takes too long for the stem to reach
that
size, so yes, the stake might as well stay in place. The trouble with
any
staking of any kind in my present garden is that it it twice as stony as
you
might think it is.

I know that our climbing wisteria has a very thick stem, too. But the
reason I think it better to leave the stake in place, is that climbing
Wisterias do have the support of wall and wires. Free-standing ones must
take all their weight on that one trunk and loll around on the ground,
doing
something they weren't originally designed for. While they're growing and
the trunk is thickening, I would think there's quite a strain on that
trunk.
You may well be right that the plant would manage without being staked,
but
if I'd got one to full maturity over a period of years, I would prefer not
to risk it.

Points taken.

Franz