Would you plant a tree that can grow very large next to your house ?

[KidKruger]

If not, why do the council ?!

Council planted a sapling 10 years ago, it's now as tall as the 3-storey Victorian houses 8 feet away. I'm sure the roots aren't clever enough to know that undermining the house may damage it so they should grow the other direction.

So why do they plant trees that they know can grow so large so close to

My neighbour's front wall is leaning where it was not beforehand.

Council say you have to PROVE it's their fault by:

a) demolishing the wall

b) dig 4ft deep to find evidence of roots passing under the wall

c) engaging a licensed surveyor to assess the hole/roots and compile a report

d) share the report with council who will then think about it

Council also said not worth chopping a large tree like this down even if IS their fault, because the reduction in water absorption may itself cause structural problems.

The people on street were not consulted/advised before the trees were planted.

Seems to defy not only common sense but respect for people's property to me.

I'm sure the tree roots are not trained to respect property so what is going on !?

[KalamityKel]

erm...

[Loz]

Get your insurance company involved. They have better lawyers than you.

[civilservant]

And then the council punitively hacks back fully grown trees - see Barry Road - to prevent tree-related subsidence and leaf-fall.

It sounds as if they need better horticulturalists.

[Huguenot]

There's not really sufficient information to start a unilateral attack on the council over this...

What kind of trees were they? is there any other localised source of subsidence? Were there trees there previously? Is there any evidence of roots below the wall? Does the tree cover provide any other positive outcomes? Do the trees provide any stabilising effects on soil movements? Etc. etc. etc.

I accept civilservant's generally cynical attitude, but there's no evidence here that there's any problem with council horticulturalists, since we have no idea of whether they were consulted, what conclusions they arrived at or why?

[KidKruger]

I've no angle against the council at all, my question is really why anyone would do this.

No subsidence previously.

I called them, when the wall started leaning (and the pavement/kerb stones around the tree base formed a small hill to walk over). The council said even the pavement condition wasn't necessarily the tree's doing. Since then the road has been resurfaced and the road relaid - now, 4 years later the pavement / kerb stones (only) around the tree are buggered and the neighbour's front wall leans more.

It seems obvious that you wouldn't plant a 40ft tree 8ft from a house, if you care about the house. The ends of the tree's branches touch the house.

I obviously wonder about the front of my house and any effects which may develop to it's detriment.

[Saffron]

Could it be because the tree in question was very cheap as a sapling? So instead of planting a more expensive, but smaller and slower growing tree, they just planted the cheapest thing they could? Guess I'm a cynic too when it comes to such.

[civilservant]

oooh! takes one to know one is all that I'll say

[Huguenot]

What kind of tree is this civilservant?

[civilservant]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What kind of tree is this civilservant?

Not one planted by a council horticulturist, that's for certain.

I remember large swathes of North London in the days (a long long time ago) when I lived there, when subsidence first became an issue. The councils responded by severe pollarding of roadside trees. Barry Road is flourishing compared to how those trees looked then.

Those trees should never have been planted where they were - any decent horticulturist would have advised against it.

So if the council is undertaking road-side planting of trees without the advice of a horticulturist, then it is behaving very foolishly - because it is laying itself open to insurance claims, which, however hard it tries to duck out of, it will be forced to pay eventually, once people have dug the necessary trenches etc. for proof.

OK, now back to Huguenot. What exactly is your problem?

[KidKruger]

Leaving who is/isn't cynical to one side, it just occurs to me that you'd have to be thinking pretty short-term to install a tree that will grow bigger than the house it's next to, only 3 metres away, given the potential damage that could be caused, every 50 meters or so, over miles and miles of built-up London streets.

Yes, there's an insurance/claims dimension to it but the (lack of ?) reasoning is what intrigues me.

[Huguenot]

KidKruger it intrigues me too - perhaps you could ask them?

Or you could create an entire backstory using civilservant's imagination?

There could be several very good reasons to plant trees that I can think of as a starter:

They are replacing previous trees and the council wanted to retain a consistent ecosystem

The rising water table was creating a threat to houses and it needed to be reduced through trees

The ground needed stabilising

Tree planting was part of an initiative to create a healthier environment and special deep rooted trees were chosen

The road was being driven unsafely and the council wanted to introduce natural disincentives to speed

Not saying any of these are true, but I am highlighting that given we don't know much about how or why they got there, civilservant's fairy tale is simply that.

What kind of trees are they btw?

[Huguenot]

Why plant urban trees... http://www.treesforcities.org/about-us/information-resources/benefits-of-urban-trees/

[the-e-dealer]

Its important to find out what sort of tree some have deep roots and drink a lot of water some have tiny roots and drink a little. Also some grow quickly some grow very slowly.

[civilservant]

... and a proper horticulturist could advise about appropriate street planting.

I like Barry Road, and the chief thing that I like about it is the trees.

I think urban tree-planting is an excellent thing, and have two large trees in my garden - one is next to the house and we have taken steps to ensure that the tree and the house can both stay in such close proximity (we inherited the tree as a mature speciment when we bought the house). Squirrels, birds and creepy-crawlies live in these trees and i fully support their right to have their existence there. People who know me would even say that I am a bit of a tree-hugger.

So I am not sure what Huguenot's beef with me is, but I now feel that - having suffered his wrath - I have come of age on the Forum!

[Huguenot]

Hardly wrath. ;-) gentle ribbing perhaps.

[civilservant]

Group hug!

[KidKruger]

I'm not a horticulturist, as is probably obvious already, but common sense (and survival of the species) suggests a tall tree needs to be well grounded so it can take the wind / weather.

A 40ft tree planted 8ft from a large house is gonna have roots going under the house since it's so close. I'd bet my house on it - in fact the Council have already bet my house on it, and my neighbour's, by planting the f*cking tree.

I'm all for green measures etc, but it's not very green-efficient causing a house structure to fail and causing the repairs which will add up to a lot of energy being used in materials/transport etc. Multiply this by many many houses and it's an insane approach.

[civilservant]

We went into this in some depth when considering what to do with our trees.

This is Royal Horticulatural Society advice on the subject http://apps.rhs.org.uk/advicesearch/Profile.aspx?pid=225

and here is advice on safe planting distances from another source (possibly a less disinterested one than the RHS) http://www.subsidencebureau.com/subsidence_trees.htm

What both concur on is that "in all cases it is wise to consult a qualified expert." BEFORE planting.

But has our Council done that? If it did, and I'm perfectly willing to acknowledge that it might have, we'd all live happily ever after in my fairy tale!

[KidKruger]

Cheers Civil, I'll have a look.

If I can identify the tree species and it the planting proximity doesn't match the advice on the RHS link you've provided I'll ask the Council what their rationale is (and whether they have ever planted a huge tree next to their buildings).

[Huguenot]

Perhaps two photos? One of a leaf next to a ruler or summat, and one of the whole tree?

[KidKruger]

Sure I can attach some pics if that's what you mean.

[Huguenot]

Yes please :)

The RHS site pretty much asserts that the fear of trees in proximity to buildings far exceeds the actual threat, but it seems to be dependent upon the tree in question.

London Plane is popular because it has a very compact root system and tall trunks, but it would be good to know what the choice was this time.

I just don't buy civilservant's assumption that this was a random act of planting - these projects are done to death by experts in city trees.

It's also worth noticing that civilservant's complaints about the pollarding are ill founded.

Different strategies for pollarding are used dependent upon the chosen outcome - spring pollarding is used to stimulate new growth or food stock. Pollarding at other times of year is designed to restrict growth or alter the structure.

[Gidget]

What I have experience in the last couple of years, when renewing my buildings insurance, is the insurance company asking if you have any trees near your house, in one case it was within 10 metres. You can't say no, because they will look on Google Earth and can see immediately if there is a tree there. Depending on what tree it is, they want to know how big it is, which they can usually see anyway, so they can and will refuse to insure your house. Had problems with 3 different insurance companies, inc. one I was already with.

Edited for clarification

[Gidget]

Another thing, poplars and sycamores are self seeding all over the place and have been for years. There are loads of them at the back of the gardens in my street. Some of them are at least 100 ft. tall. I find them in my hedge, up near my house and in the front garden. There are also self seeding elder trees, which are apparently a big no-no anywhere near a house.

Edited to include sycamores.