trees vs. houses

[treeman82]

I am just curious about something here.

How do you guys feel about large trees which are located right next to houses?

Somebody I know just bought a little house. There is a relatively large (30" DBH) norway spruce right next to it (half the tree is over the house). The tree appears to be in good condition, however it is blocking out a lot of sun from the house. I recommended pruning out dead wood and some lower branches, however the person who bought the house was considering removing it. Now he wants to just prune it.

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

i wouldn't want a tree's canopy/drip-line hanging over my property/major financial investment..you don't have to be a roofer to know this scenario can't be good for the roof..in my experience tree's and house's do not go well together ,ie you often get the following problems light deprivation,occasional physical root damage ,roof damage due to canopy/drip-line overhanging the roof ,structural subsidence when a tree is planted in clay soils and is planted to close to a house ,dead wood problems/ damage to people and property,tree branches interfering with telephone and electricity cables ,neighbor disputes when the tree grow's over a neighbors fence/boundary the list can go on and on imo it's a much better idea to plant a tree away from a property and in a suitable environment,large back or front yards should not be a problem..imo tree's arent for small yards,or close up to a house or boundery

 

[DDM]

Ive noticed more than once the Roots cracking the foundation Removed 2 white oaks week before last that were within 3' of the foundation. Cracked the bricks at both trees

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Keep the tree. Unless there is obvious damage I try to keep as many trees in the world as possible.

 

[Treeman14]

I could not imagine living in a house that didn't have trees over it. I designed my house to preserve a 50" live oak in the back yard, as well as numerous other oaks, pines, cypress, sugarberry, and maples. Where I live, the sun does more damage to roofs and shingles than the trees. Thank God for trees. I love trees.

 

[tnttreeman]

Ask all the people who have trees laying on their homes after a major storm what they think of trees close to the house. I love when I go on jobs like that in neighborhoods that are heavily wooded. When one destroys a house, the people get a new outlook on the damage trees can cause. Not to mention the "smaller" problems- ruined shingles, cracked foundations, root clogged drains, leaf filled gutters, etc. Don't get me wrong, I like the trees. But there is a place for everything. At my house I had a storm where I lost 23 trees in 7 minutes flat. Thank God the wind was blowing away from my house, or more than half of them would have smashed my place instead of littering my yard.

 

[Ekka]

Around these parts any tree within 10' of a building is exempt from protection for reasons described by Rollacosta.

Recently we cleared a house lot of trees within 20' of the building as the house needed underpinning at a cost of $20,000 ... engineers said no trees within 20'.

Property has the right of way, saving trees may be honourable but I don't think it's wise in all instances.

In storm damage work we did last year insurance assessors were putting exclusions on people's policies for further damage resulting from trees on the property. In once instance prior to the storms the council refused permisssion to get rid of a huge eucalypt, when presented with the policy exclusion they automatically backed down and gave permission.

It's time insurers took a closer look, if some-one wants a dirty great threat hanging over their property well let them pay a loaded premium. I personally have cut down every tree in my yard and now I'm working on the neighbour. We live on a 700m2 block, on a hill with clay base and I have retaining walls all around. The neighbours wattle tree roots blocked our sewer pipe and cost $500 to fix. Trees have to be in the right place and when suburbia expands too bad for the trees, leave a few in designated parks.

 

[Tree Machine]

Big Tree's and Houses

I really like pruning over top of roofs, slate roofs, copper gutters. Only mature trees tower over roofs and I personally like the look of big trees in harmony with the home, each accentuating the other.

Besides, that's where the climbing is best. One mistake, the house gets it. Critical technical. Out where you're senses peak and each action is precise and deliberate.... problem solving moment to moment. This is the place to be. In the crucible. If I could do nothing but those types of jobs all day, I'd be a happy critter.

Big trees increase property values where I am. A healthy, sound well-pruned, properly-managed mature tree is an asset to the property. My job is to see that this happens.

 

[Redbull]

It's my understanding that roots don't crack foundations. They invade cracks that were there before, meaning you had a foundation problem to begin with. I think trees can live in harmony with houses. The homeowner has to be willing to put forth the effort/money to maintain the tree, gutters, roof, etc. Just my .02
Brandon

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

It's my understanding that roots don't crack foundations. They invade cracks that were there before, meaning you had a foundation problem to begin with. I think trees can live in harmony with houses. The homeowner has to be willing to put forth the effort/money to maintain the tree, gutters, roof, etc. Just my .02
Brandon

They can break poorly designed concrete. Allso if the foundation is in the zone of rapid taper there can be problems.

If the structure is properly designed then the trees will not be a problem. The biggest problem with woody plants is that they exacerbate the dynamic properties of some clay soils in the wet/dry cycle. Drying out they pull away, while wetting they expand and can actually move slabs and walls. Roots can make the drying worse, so the movement is worse.

Mario says that it's different in the PNW where everything grows bigger. I'll have to differ to his experiance there, since I've only visited a few days. There is some science backing the idea that trees cannot move well built concrete strucures in normal parts of the world.

 

[PTS]

I think the owner first needs to decide what his/her number one goal is....
sunlight or not, mess of spruce or not, sap on roof or not.... Lots to think about.

I try not to steer customers one way or another but rather help them make up their mind with some simple facts. Reality is that the tree is going to someday have to come down. The bigger they are the more money it is going to be.

Personally I don't like trees over houses for the simple hazard of limbs falling or sap, leaves, needles getting in gutters, on shingles etc.

So I guess what I am trying to say is get it now before it gets bigger and plan a new one out away from the house. There are several varieties that are fast growers in urban settings. That within a few years will replace the shade. Talk to a local nursery to find out what is right for your area.

 

[ROLLACOSTA]

[QUOTE=Tree Machine I personally like the look of big trees in harmony with the home,


the look can be very deceiving ,i'm all for planting tree's in yard's were room allows ,i'm also all for building house's where there are mature tree's growing ,but i'm certain a tree growing over a building cant be good for either tree or building

 

[MasterBlaster]

Where's Guy M?

 

[glens]

Here's a hypothetical question for everyone:

If a tree spends very much time growing very near a house, why is it that it seems to invariably grow to spread more <i>over</i> the house than anywhere else?&nbsp; Is it because it has a better root system away from the house?&nbsp; I'm envisioning a tree holding onto the ground by pulling on it's roots rather than pushing on them (and maybe that's a wrong conclusion), so since it can afford a greater grasp on the ground away from the house it can balance better by having its weight away from those roots.

Assuming any of that is true, what happens when the limbs overhanging the structure are removed both for safety and esthetic reasons?&nbsp; Wouldn't it really create a situation where safety were compromised, by reducing the tree's ability to withstand winds that come from the direction of the structure?

I may be all washed up on this one and have wondered about it.&nbsp; Anybody want to put some facts into my thought process?

Glen

 

[murphy4trees]

Guys net connection and email went down in December... it was only supposed to be for 10 days or so.... his email is still bouncing
I'll have to give him a call

 

[Tree Machine]

Anybody want to put some facts into my thought process?Glen

Fact 1 ; It all depends on the tree. Every situation is going to be unique, with factors such as distance from the house, drainage of the soil, shade from other trees, the size of the tree, the specie of the tree.

A generalization toward your hypothetical question is just that.

I wish I had soil-penetrating infrared laser goggle. I often wonder what's going on underground when a tree is close to a house.

 

[a_lopa]

Here's a hypothetical question for everyone:

If a tree spends very much time growing very near a house, why is it that it seems to invariably grow to spread more <i>over</i> the house than anywhere else?&nbsp; Is it because it has a better root system away from the house?&nbsp; I'm envisioning a tree holding onto the ground by pulling on it's roots rather than pushing on them (and maybe that's a wrong conclusion), so since it can afford a greater grasp on the ground away from the house it can balance better by having its weight away from those roots.

Assuming any of that is true, what happens when the limbs overhanging the structure are removed both for safety and esthetic reasons?&nbsp; Wouldn't it really create a situation where safety were compromised, by reducing the tree's ability to withstand winds that come from the direction of the structure?

I may be all washed up on this one and have wondered about it.&nbsp; Anybody want to put some facts into my thought process?

Glen

very correct,placing a house next to an existing large tree is foolish,although if its vice versa things should be looked at difrently.councils/developers keeping existing trees are only kidding them selves that there really saving anything.once there huge and near enough to demolish part/all of the house,its personal preference to the owner if they want to take THERE chance with it.problem being so many arborists are non-practical other than pruning/talking they dont have the knowledge skills required,its easier to say save the tree charge a nice fee for there survey then three years latter say them trees havnt handled this well,sad but true. trees grow to there enviroment.plenty of sub-division round my parts with council wanting to retain trees so they look "green"

 

[Tree Machine]

Hi Lopa. I think Glen is proposing this. Let's say, for instance, the house is to the north of the tree. The roots to the north of the tree are limited by the fact that there's a house in the way, so the roots growing away from the house (southward) mebbe do REALLY well. That's Glen's question part 2.

Up in the canopy, the crown towers over the house. The north side (over top of the house) does really well, fed by reflected light from the roof (assuming the roofing is light in color), and <i>seems to invariably grow to spread more over the house than anywhere else</i>, Glen's question part 1.

Assuming this phenomenon is true, if you were to prune limbs over the house, would it

compromise safety in some way by reducing the tree's ability to withstand winds that come from the direction of the structure?

Like, would the tree the be off-balance somehow by bringing it back into balance. Doubt it.

Would the tree's ability to withstand winds be compromised? I would think with fewer limbs, it would reduce the overall windsail effect and <i>help the tree</i> to withstand winds, although I think it would be rather negligible. But then again, I can't see underground, nor have any way of seeing, measuring or truly understanding the forces compared with bfore pruning vs after pruning. Basically, Glen, I don't have an honest clue.

 

[Tree Machine]

Ooops, forgot one thing.....

I DO know this. If you prune a giant, and leave a redirect way up in the top of the tree, some day ya gotta go back up and get it.

 

[Tree Machine]

Read TreeCo's lips, Pho -to- tro- pism .