Reminds me of Viburnum or maybe an extremely large Cotoneaster but it would probably have fruit about now. If it's in Seattle proper, and you know the location, I can try to track it down in my Trees of Seattle book. I can't tell if it's a tree or just an old specimen shrub and if it's evergreen or not.
I agree with Resin - some clearer images of the stems showing the leaf arrangements should be provided. That is always great for primary determination for at least what a plant isn't.
Chides @ growin: all self-respecting Viburnum sp. will be opposite, while Cotoneaster sp. favor alternate arrangements.
All that said: I seem to make out alternate arrangement of foliage from the first and third images. Nixes Viburnum sp. as a choice. As Resin notes - the felted leaf undersides are a key, as are what look like pretty fuzzy petioles on those leaves.
Take a shot of the WHOLE plant. Snip one of those many wayward stems, and bring it back home where you can focus on some of the smaller details (like buds).
Just got back to take pictures of the tree. I have Eribotrya (loquat) as part of my photo collection so I should know what it should look like. I think the tree is about to come down as it is taped with the yellow police "do not cross" tape by the trunk. I think it a wild tree from seeds or something.
hello vn...are you sure the photos were taken in Seattle? there seemed to me to be something amiss about them, something not quite right...oh yes, the sky is BLUE...you photo shopped that in right? :-D
[quote="vitrsna"]hello vn...are you sure the photos were taken in Seattle? there seemed to me to be something amiss about them, something not quite right...oh yes, the sky is BLUE...you photo shopped that in right? :-D[/quote]
The first set of images were taken in Seattle. The weather was so nice I decided to walk around the neighborhood to take some photos. Some members here asked me to take more pictures so i went back there today which is cloudy with scattering shower.
I use iphoto, not Adobe photoshop.
Meant to say first set of images taken in Seattle yesterday.
hello vn...well, my comment was meant to be funny (like a joke). i lived in Seattle for a couple dozen years plus or minus and we were always joking about the weather...for example, during a picnic gathering (on a sunny day i might add) someone brought a book of black and white photos of very old Seattle and we were all looking and admiring and trying to place the photos and one person piped up with "yes, and the photos are all in very good color too"...it took us about 15 minutes to stop laughing. good luck with your id.
I wasn't offended! Everyone from out of town who came to Seattle and didn't see the rain or shower they were surprised!
I walked around the neighborhood to take some photos and even if this one is not identified I am not loosing sleep over it! If it is not being hacked down, I could go back in the spring to see if it blooms or not.
Perhaps you will have to help us in deciding whether leaves are alternate or opposite to proceed further. In the third photograph of the first set most leaves arising near the trunk (hope they belong to same plant) are alternate. In the second set some branches seem to have a few alternate leaves (unless the other leaf has fallen off), but there seem two opposite leaves, topped by a single leaf of same size (rather than bud). This seems to create some confusion. Please get one or two good photographs to clear this issue.
I am uploading images of Eriobotrya japonica from Sunnyvale CA, and Kashmir for comparison with first photograph of first set. They are surely dentate in E. deflexa (sorry for my earlier typo error E. excelsa) but fairly entire in E. japonica
Images of Eriobotrya japonica from California and Kashmir
vngarden's plant lacks corrugation and is fairly flat. It also lacks the minimal serrations on Eriobotrya. The caution tape looks like it's been there for a while so I doubt it's coming down anytime soon. I still have this weird feeling it's an old Rhodo.
You first image is making a run at entirety, though there are minimal serrations/bristles in there. Your second image has a mouthful of teeth (well, maybe better described as bristles) along those margins.
Is this what you mean? From http://www.thefreedictionary.com/decussate :
[quote]2. Botany - Arranged on a stem in opposite pairs at right angles to those above or below, resulting in four vertical rows: decussate leaves.[/quote]
That is similar or the same term as ranked, as in what I think Weigela florida and Physostegia virginiana leaves look like along the stem - not the unknown plant above.
Please don't misunderstand - not claiming any superior botanical prowess...more looking for affirmation that I think I understand the terminology.
Ok, leaf arrangement FAIL on my part. What I find strange is on the second set of photos of this plant, first image, shows a branch in the middle-top with both opposite and alternate. Go figure. Check out this pic: http://www.rhodogroup-rhs.org/Dictionary/Rhododendron/R.delavayi.htm it grows tall enough, has the white indumentum on the undersides and I've seen them around.
Having discussed various options and Eriobotrya being out of contention, I think Rhodendron seems to be best option. I was already uncomfortable with opposite leaves suggestion, but now Opposite and decussate leaves has further stumped me. I wish vngarden comes to our rescue. This is how a typical opposite and decussate condition would present (it is Stellaria meda image)